Skip to main content

Full text of "History of the Indiana democracy, 1816-1916"

See other formats



3  1833  02141  9996 

Gc    977.2    St6hi 
Stoll,     John    B.,     1843-1926, 
History    of    the    Indiana 
democracy,     1816-1916 

^Thomas Jefferson  filAVANDREW Jackson  f 


g,    I  Samuel  J  Tilden_ 





By  JOHN   B.   STOLL 









N  I  N  E  T  E  E  N  .  S  E  V  E  N  T  E  E  N 



URING  the  three  years  that  I  was  engaged  in  writing  this  book, 
the  early  history  of  Indiana  naturally  often  became  the  sub- 
ject of  conversation  in  mingling  with  educators,  legislators, 
politicians,  editors  and  men  engaged  in  professional  and  busi- 
ness pursuits.  In  all  these  talks  but  one  individual  revealed 
knowledge  of  the  fact  that  under  the  first  constitution,  in  force 
from  1816  to  1851,  the  people  of  the  commonwealth  were  per- 
mitted to  vote  for  and  elect  only  two  State  officers — Governor 
and  Lieutenant-Governor.  Other  State  officers  were  elected 
by  the  General  Assembly.    Judges  were  appointed  by  the  Governor. 

Among  all  those  with  whom  I  conversed  relative  to  these  matters,  there 
,was  not  a  single  one  cognizant  of  the  fact  that  the  first  constitution  of  In- 
diana never  was  submitted  to  popular  vote  for  adoption  or  rejection,  but 
became  the  supreme  law  of  the  State  as  drafted  by  the  constitutional  con- 
vention, whose  members  had  been  chosen  by  the  voters  of  the  territory. 

The  idea  of  a  responsible  leadership  and  belief  in  the  efficacy  of  a  rep- 
resentative government  were  far  more  strongly  intrenched  in  the  public 
mind  than  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  case  when  in  later  years  popular 
delusion  gave  emphasis  to  the  theory  that  ability  and  power  to  lead  meant 
curtailment  of  the  right  of  the  people  to  rule. 

Thoughtful  perusal  of  this  book  will  make  clear  what  sort  of  govern- 
ment the  founders  of  the  Republic  had  in  mind  when  they  established  the 
United  States  of  North  America.  A  clear  understanding  can  be  gathered 
of  the  principles  applied  in  the  formation  of  this  government  by  closely  fol- 
lowing the  historical  recital  in  the  opening  chapters.  No  one  can  intelli- 
gently peruse  the  pages  of  this  book  without  becoming  greatly  enriched  in 
information  that  will  be  found  of  incalculable  value  in  the  exercise  of  the 
prerogatives  of  citizenship  and  the  performance  of  duty  devolving  upon  an 
alert  and  patriotic  electorate. 

[Chapter  I.] 





pMINALLY,  the  Democratic 
party,  whose  history  in  Indiana 
it  is  the  purpose  of  this  volume 
to  narrate,  is  younger  by  a 
dozen  years  than  the  State 
itself;  but  in  its  principles,  al- 
though not  in  its  name,  it 
traces  its  lineage  to  Thomas  Jefferson, 
the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, and  in  that  sense  is  as  old  as 
the  Nation.  The  State  of  Indiana,  and 
the  country  in  which  it  is  an  important 
commonwealth,  have  never  been  without 
a  political  party.  Wherever  the  active 
life  of  the  people  has  been  developed,  po- 
litical parties  have  always  sprung  into 
existence.  An  absence  of  political  parties 
would  be  an  indication  of  passive  indiffer- 
ence to  their  true  interests  on  the  part  of 
the  people,  or  of  tyrannical  repression  on 
the  part  of  their  rulers. 

The  freest  and  most  gifted  nations  have 
the  most  sharply  defined  political  partisan- 
ship. It  is  not  a  commendable  virtue  for 
a  citizen  to  stand  aloof  from  political 
activity,  and  it  should  be  a  shame  rather 
than  a  boast  for  any  intelligent  person  to 
declare  that  he  does  not  affiliate  with  or 
"belong"  to  a  political  party. 

Edmund  Burke  defined  a  political  party 
as  "a  body  of  men  united  in  promoting,  by 
their  joint  endeavors,  the  national  inter- 
est in  some  particular  policy  or  movement 
in  which  they  are  all  agreed."  The  very 
name  "party"  indicates  that  each  such 
body  of  men  represents  but  a  part  of  the 
citizens.  Therefore,  a  party  possesses  the 
consciousness  of  only  one  part  of  the  Na- 

tion and  has  no  right  to  attempt  to  identi- 
fy itself  with  the  whole  and  arrogate  to 
itself  all  the  virtues  and  patriotism  of  the 
people.  Convinced  that  its  principles  are 
for  the  best  interests  of  the  public,  it  may 
rightfully  combat  for  them  and  seek  to 
have  them  prevail,  but  it  has  no  right  to 
ignore  the  views  of  those  who  differ  from 
it  or  to  seek  the  utter  destruction  of  other 
parties.  In  fact,  the  experience  of  popu- 
lar governments  demonstrates  that  the 
public  interest  is  best  promoted  by  the  ex- 
istence of  two  nearly  equally  balanced  po- 
litical parties. 

During  the  Revolutionary  War,  which 
resulted  in  the  establishment  of  this  Na- 
tion, there  were  but  two  parties — those 
favoring  continued  allegiance  to  Great 
Britain,  and  those  supporting  the  move- 
ment for  independence.  The  latter  called 
themselves  Patriots,  and  the  others 
Tories ;  while  the  former  designated  them- 
selves as  Loyalists  and  their  opponents  as 
Rebels.  Doubtless  both  were  sincere,  and 
high  authority  has  defined  a  patriot  revo- 
lutionist as  a  "simply  successful  rebel." 

The  Confederation  in  which  the  Colonies 
had  united  to  achieve  their  independence 
was  soon  found  inadequate  to  meet  the 
exigencies  of  an  independent  Nation.  So 
a  convention  was  called  to  amend  the  Arti- 
cles of  Confederation.  At  once  two  par- 
ties appeared.  One,  including  Washing- 
ton, Hamilton,  Franklin  and  Pinckney,  be- 
lieved a  strong  central  government  neces- 
.sary.  The  other,  including  Thomas  Jeffer- 
.son,  Patrick  Henrj',  Samuel  Adams, 
George  Clinton  and  James  Monroe,  feared 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

that  the  central  government,  if  too  power- 
ful, would  infringe  upon  the  liberty  of  the 
people.  The  former  party  was  called  Fed- 
eralist, and  the  latter  Anti-Federalist. 
The  Federal  Constitution,  as  finally 
adopted,  was  a  compromise,  providing  an 
instrument  capable  of  a  double  interpreta- 
tion on  the  disputed  point,  and  the  two 
parties  continued  under  the  new  govern- 
ment. The  Federalists  gave  the  Constitu- 
tion a  broad  construction  with  large  pow- 
ers to  the  Nation,  while  the  Anti-Federal- 
ists gave  a  strict  construction,  which  made 
the  States  the  paramount  authority  except 
in  specially  defined  cases.  Alexander 
Hamilton  was  from  the  first  the  leader  of 
the  former  party,  and  Thomas  Jefferson 
was  soon  recognized  as  the  head  of  the 
latter.  Both  men  were  members  of  Presi- 
dent Washington's  cabinet.  But  the  Pres- 
ident's firm  conviction  of  the  necessity  for 
a  strong  central  government  enabled  the 
Federalists  to  control  the  policy  of  Con- 
gress during  the  first  twelve  years — the 
formative  period  of  the  new  government. 
Besides,  through  the  life  tenure  of  the 
members  of  the  Supreme  Court,  Federal- 
ist views  on  the  construction  of  the  Con- 
stitution prevailed  for  many  years  in  the 
judicial  branch  of  the  government. 

Jefl'erson's  political  sagacity  led  him 
early  to  perceive  that  an  "anti"  party 
would  not  successfully  appeal  to  the  peo- 
ple, so  he  sought  a  party  name  that  should 
stand  for  something  affirmative.  His  own 
idealism  in  connection  with  a  residence  in 
France  made  him  an  admirer  of  the  prin- 
ciples set  forth  by  the  French  in  establish- 
ing their  Republic.  Moreover,  there  pul- 
sated throughout  this  country  a  feeling  of 
grateful  sympathy  for  France  because  of 
the  assistance  she  had  rendered  us  in  our 
war  for  independence.  With  shrewd  po- 
litical wisdom  Jefferson  appropriated  this 
sympathy  by  using  the  term  which  the 
French  had  employed  and  named  his  party 
"Republican."  The  Anti-Federalists  had 
already  accused  Hamilton  of  influencing 

Washington  to  favor  a  government  mod- 
eled after  that  of  England,  which,  under 
popular  forms,  would,  they  asserted, 
actually  establish  monarchical  or,  at  best, 
aristocratic  rule.  In  fact,  in  the  political 
bitterness  of  the  times,  the  Federalists 
were  often  by  their  opponents  called  mon- 

The  formal  beginning  of  this  Repub- 
lican party  dates  from  May  13,  1792, 
when  JeflFerson,  still  a  member  of  the 
Cabinet,  addressed  a  letter  to  President 
Washington  in  which  he  said:  "The  Re- 
publican party,  who  wish  to  preserve  the 
government  in  its  present  form,  are  fewer 
in  numbers  than  the  Monarchical  Federal- 
ists. They  are  fewer,  even  when  joined 
by  the  two  or  three,  or  half  a  dozen  Anti- 
Federalists,  who,  though  they  dare  not 
avow  it,  are  still  opposed  to  any  general 
government;  but  being  less  so  to  a  Re- 
publican than  to  a  monarchical  one,  they 
naturally  side  with  those  whom  they  think 
pursuing  the  lesser  evil." 

This  may  be  taken  as  the  platform  of 
the  Jeffersonian  Republican  party;  and 
no  political  pronouncement  was  ever  more 
adroitly  worded  to  appeal  to  all  the  dis- 
satisfied elements  of  the  people.  Its  as- 
sumption that  the  Federalists  were  pre- 
paring the  way  for  a  monarchy;  its  ap- 
parent solicitude  for  the  preservation  of 
the  Constitution,  and  its  repudiation  of 
the  views  of  the  extreme  States'  Rights 
partisan,  were  calculated  to  attract  not 
only  the  actual  opponents  of  the  adminis- 
tration, but  the  conservative  supporters 
of  the  new  form  of  government. 

Washington's  proclamation  of  neutrali- 
ty in  the  war  between  France  and  Eng- 
land brought  into  prominence  a  class  of 
active  politicians  among  the  sympathizers 
with  the  former  country.  They  assumed 
the  name  "Democrat"  and  formed  a  circle 
of  societies  patterned  after  the  Jacobin 
Clubs  of  Paris.  One  of  them,  indeed,  the 
Charleston  Society,  actually  affiliated  with 
the  Paris  Clubs.     Their  prime  instigator 


1  9  1 

was  the  French  ambassador,  Genet.  These 
societies  became  quite  numerous  in  the 
central  and  southern  states.  For  a  time 
they  were  very  active  and  extremely  vin- 
dictive in  language,  branding  all  who  did 
not  agree  with  them  as  enemies  of  "the 
people."  They  humored  the  whims  and 
passions  of  the  more  ignorant  masses,  as- 
sumed eccentricities  of  dress  and  lan- 
guage, and  expressed  contempt  for  all 
constituted  authority.  With  the  natural 
instinct  of  their  class  to  be  "agin'  the  gov- 
ernment," they  sided  with  the  party  of 
Jefferson  and  called  themselves,  political- 
ly, "Democratic-Republicans,"  and  were 
particularly  vicious  in  abuse  of  Washing- 
ton. The  Federalists  were  horrified  and 
the  Republican  leaders  disgusted  with 
their  antics ;  nevertheless,  the  latter  were 
naturally  not  averse  to  receiving  the  aid 
of  their  votes. 

With  the  same  spirit  which  during  the 
Civil  War  led  the  two  political  parties  at 
the  North  to  dub  their  opponents  respect- 
ively   as    "Abolitionists"    and    "Copper- 
heads," the  Republicans  in  those  days  had 
called  the  Federalists  "Monarchists,"  and 
now  the  Federalists  retorted  by  terming 
the  Republicans  "Democrats." 
®        These  "Democratic-Republicans,"  how- 
05    ever,    were   not   the   progenitors    of   the 
^    Democratic  party  whose  illustrious  lead- 
?    ers  later  helped  to  build  the  greatness  of 
o    Indiana.    Their  societies  were  regarded  in 
M    those  days  very  much  as  is  the  I.  W.  W. 
00    organization    at    present.      A    prominent 
„    member  of  the  Jeffersonian  party,  Hon. 
Edward  Livingston,  speaking  years  after 
of  the  conditions  at  that  time,  stated  that 
gross  as  were  the  attacks  upon  Washing- 
ton,   they    came   from    Bache,    Leib   and 
Duane,  and  the  noisy  and  frequently  silly 
leaders  of  the  professed  Democrats;  and 
it  is  greatly  creditable  to  the  Republicans 
proper  that  their  opposition  to  Washing- 
ton's administration  was  legitimate,  and 
their  public  utterances  were  decorous  and 
affectionate    toward    the    President    per- 

Although  later  writers  have  applied  the 
names  "Democrat,"  "Republican,"  and 
"Democratic-Republican"  interchangeably 
to  the  party  of  Jefferson,  there  is 
abundant  evidence  that  for  a  quarter  of 
a  century  the  party  leaders  avoided  the 
name  assumed  by  the  imitators  of  the 
Jacobin  Clubs  of  Paris,  and  it  is  said  that 
Andrew  Jackson  in  those  early  years  de- 
nounced the  appellation  "Democrat"  as  a 
political  slander.  At  any  rate,  when  Jef- 
ferson, in  his  first  inaugural,  appealing 
for  the  support  of  the  entire  American 
people,  declared  "We  are  all  Federalists, 
we  are  all  Republicans,"  he  did  not  men- 
tion any  Democrats.  The  fact  is  that  the 
suppression  of  the  whisky  insurrection, 
which  those  societies  were  charged  with 
having  incited,  and,  a  little  later,  the 
threatened  war  with  France,  virtually 
drove  them  out  of  existence.  It  was  not 
until  the  odium  created  by  the  folly  and 
extravagancies  of  their  promoters  had 
been  forgotten  in  the  lapse  of  years,  that 
the  term  Democratic  in  its  true  sense  of 
"rule  by  the  demos" — all  the  people — was 
revived  in  its  old  glorious  Grecian  mean- 
ing and  accepted  by  a  political  party  in 
this  country.  And  that  occurred  when 
the  State  of  Indiana  was  twelve  years 

The  Federalist  party,  of  which  Alex- 
ander Hamilton  was  the  acknowledged 
leader,  had  two  objectives :  First,  to  form 
a  government  strong  enough  to  make  and 
hold  a  place  among  the  nations  of  the 
earth;  and,  secondly,  to  create  a  central 
authority  sufficiently  powerful  to  coalesce 
the  diverse  and  often  conflicting  interests 
of  the  various  states  into  one  general  wel- 
fare. In  pursuit  of  the  first  objective 
James  Madison  was  in  hearty  and  active 
accord  with  Hamilton,  and  they  worked 
together  effectively,  through  the  framing 
and  adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution, 
and  the  first  two  years  of  Washington's 
administration — the  vital  period  in  the 
organization  of  the  government.  To  Madi- 


-19  1 

son  was  due  very  largely  the  framing  of 
the  "Compromises  of  the  Constitution" — 
those  phrases  on  which  differing  construc- 
tions could  be  and  have  been  placed.  It 
was  as  to  the  meaning  of  these  phrases 
that  the  distinction  of  "Strict  Construc- 
tionist" and  "Broad  Constructionist" 
arose.  Jefferson,  whose  absence  from  the 
country  as  Minister  to  France  from  1785 
had  prevented  him  from  taking  part  in 
the  framing  or  adoption  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, became,  on  his  return  in  1789,  the 
leader  of  the  Strict  Constructionists,  and 
on  matters  of  internal  policy  he  was 
joined  by  Madison.  There  were,  however, 
able  and  patriotic  men  on  both  sides  of 
the  question — said  question  being  funda- 
mentally", whether  the  Federal  govern- 
ment has  only  limited,  strictly  defined 
powers,  leaving  the  States  supreme  within 
their  respective  borders,  and,  in  conse- 
quence, whether  the  primary  allegiance 
of  the  citizen  is  due  to  his  State  or  to  the 
Nation.  This  question  was  not  finally  set- 
tled until  it  was  decided  by  the  arbitra- 
ment of  arms  in  the  Civil  War. 

It  is  interesting  to  note,  however,  that 
whatever  may  have  been  their  theory  as 
to  the  construction  of  the  Constitution, 
the  six  most  noted  Presidents  have  not 
hesitated  to  exercise  the  broadest  govern- 
mental and  executive  authority  when,  in 
their  judgment,  the  "general  welfare"  de- 
manded it.  Washington  did  this  in  the 
whisky  insurrection  and  in  his  proclama- 
tion of  neutrality  in  the  war  between 
France  and  England;  Jefferson  did  it  in 
the  purchase  of  Louisiana,  and  in  laying 
the  embargo;  Jackson  did  it  in  removing 
the  bank  deposits,  and  in  suppressing 
nullification;  Lincoln  did  it  in  suspending 
the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  and  in  issuing 
the  emancipation  proclamation;  Cleveland 
did  it  in  the  Chicago  strike,  and  in  his 
notice  to  England  in  the  Venezuela  mat- 
ter, and  Roosevelt  did  it  in  the  anthracite 
troubles  and  in  acquiring  the  Panama 
canal  zone. 

The  first  popular  test  between  the  Fed- 
eralist and  Republican  parties  came  in  the 
presidential  election  of  1796.  There  were 
no  formal  nominations,  but  a  general  as- 
sent that  the  Federalist  candidate  for 
President  should  be  Washington's  asso- 
ciate as  Vice-President,  John  Adams,  and 
that  the  Republican  candidate  should  be 
Thomas  Jefferson.  The  electors  at  that 
time  voted  for  two  candidates.  The  one 
having  the  highest  vote  became  President 
and  the  one  with  the  next  highest,  Vice- 
President.  As  to  their  second  choice,  the 
Republicans  were  divided  between  Aaron 
Burr  and  Samuel  Adams — Burr  receiving 
30  votes  and  Adams  15.  The  Federalists 
were  likewise  divided — Thomas  Pinckney 
of  South  Carolina  having  59,  and  Oliver 
Ellsworth  of  Connecticut,  11.  There  were 
also  a  number  of  scattering  votes,  Wash- 
ington himself  receiving  one.  Of  the  two 
chief  candidates,  Adams  received  71  votes 
and  Jefferson  68.  Thus  Adams  became 
President  and  Jefferson  Vice-President. 
A.  K.  McClure,  in  his  book,  "Our  Presi- 
dents and  How  We  Make  Them,"  says  of 
this  election:  "In  no  modern  national 
campaign  have  the  candidates  been  so  ma- 
liciously defamed  as  were  those  in  this 
contest  of  the  fathers  of  the  republic. 
Jefferson  was  denounced  as  an  unscrupu- 
lous demagogue,  and  Adams  was  de- 
nounced as  a  kingly  despot  without 
sympathy  for  the  people  and  opposed  to 
every  principle  of  popular  government." 

The  alien  and  sedition  laws  enacted  dur- 
ing Adams'  administration  were  an  ex- 
treme exercise  of  centralized  power.  They 
were  aimed  at  the  practices  of  the  Demo- 
cratic societies,  but  were  opposed  by 
Hamilton  as  uncalled  for,  unwise,  and  a 
fatal  political  blunder.  They  tended,  as 
he  foresaw,  to  make  the  Federalist  ad- 
ministration obnoxious  to  the  people. 
Washington  died  during  the  last  days  of 
the  year  1799,  and  the  campaign  of  1800 
was  a  repetition  of  that  of  four  years 
previous,  both  in  the  personality  of  the 



18  16-191 

candidates  and  the  virulence  of  the  oppos- 
ing sides.  This  time  each  party  voted 
unitedly  for  its  two  candidates,  giving  the 
opportunity  for  a  tie.  The  Republicans 
had  73  electoral  votes  for  Jefferson  and 
Burr,  and  the  Federalists  65  for  Adams 
and  Pinckney.  As  the  vote  was  a  tie  be- 
tween Jefferson  and  Burr,  and  as  each  had 
a  majority  of  the  electoral  college,  the 
House  of  Representatives,  under  the  Con- 
stitution, had  to  elect  one  of  the  two  as 
President,  whereupon  the  other  would  be- 
come Vice-President.  As  the  Federalists 
were  "out  of  it"  so  far  as  a  candidate  of 
their  own  was  concerned,  their  Represen- 
tatives in  Congress  either  abstained  from 
voting,  or  voted  as  personal  or  partisan 
motives  influenced  them.  The  voting  was 
by  States,  and  the  contest  continued  seven 
days.  Hamilton,  regarding  Jefferson  as 
much  the  safer  man  for  President,  cast 
his  influence  in  his  favor  and  he  finally 
received  the  votes  of  ten  States  to  four 
for  Burr  and  two  blank. 

This  action  of  Hamilton  aroused  the  un- 
dying hatred  of  Aaron  Burr,  and  was  the 
underlying  cause  of  the  challenge  to  a 
duel,  which  the  "code  of  honor"  of  that 
day  compelled  Hamilton  to  accept,  and  in 
which  he  was  killed.  Before  his  death, 
however,  Hamilton  had  warmly  sustained 
the  action  of  Jefferson  in  the  acquisition 
of  Louisiana,  although  most  of  the  Fed- 
eralists, for  partisan  reasons,  denounced 
the  purchase  as  bitterly  as  latter-day  anti- 
imperialists  have  denounced  the  acquisi- 
tion of  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines. 
Indeed,  such  is  the  course  of  politics  that 
had  Hamilton  lived  it  is  not  a  violent  pre- 
sumption that  he  and  Jefferson  would  have 
been  actively  co-operating  for  the  good 
of  the  country. 

Adams  took  his  defeat  hard.  He  packed 
his  goods  and  left  the  White  House  at 
midnight  of  March  3.  Still  time  tempers 
even  the  asperities  of  politics.  Adams 
lived  to  see  his  son  hold  important  offices 
under  Jefferson  and  his   successors,  and 

even  to  be  a  Republican  President.  There 
was,  moreover,  friendly  correspondence 
between  Jefferson  and  Adams,  and  both 
died  on  the  Fourth  of  July,  1826 — the 
fiftieth  anniversary  of  the  day  made 
memorably  glorious  by  their  mutual 
action  in  the  Continental  Congress. 

Burr  resigned  the  Vice-Presidency,  bade 
farewell  to  the  Senate  in  a  speech  that 
moved  even  his  enemies  to  tears,  em- 
barked upon  a  scheme  to  wrest  Mexico 
from  the  Spaniards  and  establish  either 
an  independent  republic  or  an  empire,  was 
tried  for  treason  on  the  charge  that  he 
intended  to  seize  part  of  Louisiana  in  the 
scheme,  and,  though  acquitted,  was  thor- 
oughly discredited,  and  died  in  poverty 
and  obscurity.* 

The  experience  at  this  election  led  to 
an  amendment  of  the  Constitution  estab- 
lishing the  present  system  of  electing  the 
President  and  Vice-President  by  separate 
votes  of  the  electors. 

In  the  administration  of  his  office  Jef- 
ferson practiced  the  democratic  simplicity 
of  manners  which  he  professed.  He 
avoided  all  pomp  and  ceremony.  The 
stories  of  his  hitching  his  horse  to  the 
fence  on  the  occasion  of  his  inauguration, 
and  of  his  receiving  foreign  ministers  in 
dressing-gown  and  slippers,  are  probably 
as  mythical  as  the  tale  of  Washington  and 
the  cherry  tree,  or  of  Jackson's  smoking 

*The  retirement  of  Aaron  Burr  from  the  Vice- 
Presidency  before  the  expiration  of  his  term  has 
been  variously  treated  by  historians.  Some  have 
entirely  ignored  it,  and  some  have  called  it  "resig- 
nation." Parton  says  he  "took  leave  of  the  Sen- 
ate," and  gives  a  dramatic  account  of  the  scene 
when  the  Senators,  moved  to  tears  by  Burr's  elo- 
quence, unanimously  adopted  resolutions  extolling 
his  fairness  as  presiding  officer,  and  proceeded  to 
elect  one  of  their  number  as  president  pro-tem  to 
succeed  him.  The  event  occurred  during  execu- 
tive session  March  2,  1805.  Burr's  motive  can 
only  be  surmised.  He  himself  quietly  attributed 
it  to  "indisposition,"  which  might  refer  to  physical 
illness  and  might  mean  that  he  was  "indisposed" 
to  participation  in  the  installation  of  his  hated 
enemy,  George  Clinton,  the  vice-president  elect. 
Possibly  he  desired  the  spectacular  effect  actually 
produced.  But,  whatever  his  motive,  or  by  what- 
ever name  the  act  be  designated,  Aaron  Burr  abso- 
lutely relinquished  the  Vice-Presidency  two  days 
before  his  term  of  office  expired. 




a  corn-cob  pipe  while  transacting  business 
with  representatives  of  other  nations. 
But,  instead  of  delivering  his  inaugural 
address  in  person,  as  Washington  and 
Adams  had  done,  after  the  manner  of  the 
King  of  England  to  Parliament,  he  sent  in 
a  written  message  to  be  read  by  the  clerk, 
thus  establishing  a  precedent  that  was  fol- 
lowed by  all  of  his  successors  until  the 
time  of  Woodrow  Wilson,  who  returned 
to  the  practice  of  Washington. 

For  the  elections  of  1804,  formal  nomi- 
nations were  for  the  first  time  made.  The 
Republican  members  of  Congress  met  in 
caucus  and  renominated  Jefferson  for 
President,  at  the  same  time  nominating 
George  Clinton  of  New  York  for  Vice- 
President.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the 
Congressional  caucus  nominations  which 
continued  until  the  time  of  Jackson.  It 
was,  however,  but  the  nationalizing  of  a 
practice  that  had  grown  up  in  several 
States,  by  which  the  members  of  the 
Legislatures  in  their  respective  party  cau- 
cuses had  named  candidates  for  State 
offices  and  Congressmen,  and  sometimes 
indicated  the  choice  of  the  State  for  Presi- 
dent. The  Federalists  made  no  open  nomi- 
nations, but  their  leaders  united  on 
Charles  C.  Pinckney  of  South  Carolina  for 
President  and  Rufus  King  of  New  York 
for  Vice-President.  The  election  showed 
the  complete  collapse  of  the  Federalist 
party.  Jefferson  and  Clinton  had  162 
electoral  votes,  while  Pinckney  and  King 
had  but  14. 

The  early  custom  had  been  for  the  Vice- 
President  to  follow  as  President.  Adams 
had  been  Vice-President  under  Washing- 
ton, and  Jefferson  under  Adams.  But  as 
Jefferson's  second  term  approached  its 
close  there  were  indications  that  he  pre- 
ferred his  Secretary  of  State,  James  Madi- 
son, for  his  successor.  There  was  some 
demurring  in  Virginia  where  the  friends 
of  James  Monroe,  feeling  that  he  had  not 
been  treated  fairly,  urged  him  for  the 
presidency.      The    Congressional    caucus, 

however,  was  controlled  by  the  friends  of 
Madison,  and  nominated  him  for  Presi- 
dent, re-nominating  George  Clinton  for 
Vice-President.  There  was  considerable 
ill  feeling,  especially  in  Virginia,  where 
the  "Quids,"  led  by  John  Randolph  of 
Roanoke,  for  a  time  threatened  a  serious 
defection.  The  trouble,  however,  was  al- 
layed by  the  influence  of  Jefferson,  who 
arranged  that  Monroe  should  enter  the 
Cabinet  as  Secretary  of  State,  and  thus 
be  in  line  as  Madison's  successor,  accord- 
ing to  the  new  order  of  promotion.  The 
Federalists  again  informally  accepted 
Pinckney  and  King  as  candidates  without 
nomination,  and  made  a  desperate  rally 
to  regain  power.  The  result  was  a  slight 
gain,  as  they  had  47  electoral  votes  to  122 
for  Madison. 

Like  some  other  Presidents  since,  who 
have  been  chosen  in  deference  to  the 
wishes  of  their  predecessors,  Madison  did 
not  measure  up  to  the  expectations  of  his 
friends.  He  was  greater  in  constructive 
than  in  executive  ability.  Constitutionally 
a  man  of  peace,  he  was  confronted  by  con- 
ditions of  war,  and  his  administration 
seemed  on  the  point  of  failure  when  a 
number  of  the  younger  element  in  Con- 
gress, led  by  Henry  Clay,  John  C.  Cal- 
houn, William  H.  Crawford  and  Felix 
Grundy,  forced  him  into  a  more  active 
policy,  including  a  declaration  of  war 
against  England — a  war,  however,  for 
which  the  country  was  absolutely  unpre- 
pared, and  in  which  it  was  saved  from 
utter  disgrace  only  by  the  heroism  of  its 
improvised  navy,  and  the  brilliant  vic- 
tory of  the  volunteers  under  Andrew  Jack- 
son at  New  Orleans. 

Madison  was,  however,  re-nominated  in 
1812  by  the  Congressional  caucus,  though 
the  discontent  in  his  own  party  was  so 
great  that  fifty  members  absented  them- 
selves. George  Clinton,  after  serving 
nearly  eight  years  as  Vice-President,  had 
died  in  office  and  been  buried  at  Wash- 
ington, whence  his  remains  were  removed 


1  9  1 

to  New  York  one  hundred  years  later.  So 
the  caucus  nominated  John  Langdon  of 
New  Hampshire,  the  first  president  pro 
tem.  of  the  Senate,  for  Vice-President,  but 
he  declined  and  a  second  caucus  named 
Elbridge  Gerry  of  "gerrymandering" 
fame  in  Massachusetts. 

The  re-nomination  of  Madison  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  first  "bolt"  in  our  national 
politics.  The  Republican  members  of  the 
New  York  Legislature  nominated  their 
party  leader  in  the  State,  DeWitt  Clinton, 
as  an  opposition  candidate.  The  Federal- 
ists made  no  nomination  for  President, 
but  at  a  conference  the  leaders  agreed  to 
support  Clinton  and  named  Jared  Inger- 
soU  of  Pennsylvania    for    Vice-President. 

Thus  the  Republican  party  was  divided, 
with  the  Federalists  generally  supporting 
Clinton.  But  the  war  he  had  been  so 
averse  to  waging  rallied  to  support  Madi- 
son and  he  was  elected  by  a  vote  of  122  to 
89.  DeWitt  Clinton  afterward  took  part 
in  the  organization  of  the  Whig  party,  and 
as  Governor  of  New  York  State  achieved 
a  national  reputation  and  wonderfully 
aided  the  development  of  his  own  State 
and  of  the  great  West  by  the  construction 
of  the  Erie  Canal. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  in  regard  to  the 
"war  of  1812"  that  owing  to  the  slowness 
of  communication  in  those  days,  some  of 
the  events  of  the  greatest  political  impor- 
tance connected  with  it  actually  took 
place  after  the  treaty  of  peace  had  been 
signed.  The  signatures  were  affixed  De- 
cember 24,  1814.  The  Hartford  Conven- 
tion was  then  in  session,  and  early  in 
January  passed  the  resolutions  denounc- 
ing the  war,  which  sealed  the  fate  of  the 
Federalists.  Under  a  proclamation  of 
President  Madison,  January  12  was  ob- 
served as  a  day  of  fasting  and  prayer  for 
peace,  and  more  than  all,  on  January  8, 
General  Jackson,  with  7,000  volunteers, 
defeated  10,000  British  veterans,  and  won 
the  battle  of  New  Orleans,  which  victory 
made  him  President  later  on. 

While  the  two  elections  of  James  Mon- 
roe have,  because  of  the  lack  of  opposi- 
tion, been  termed  the  "era  of  good  feel- 
ing," his  path  to  the  first  nomination  was 
by  no  means  easy.  He  was  not  personal- 
ly popular.  William  H.  Crawford,  a  Sena- 
tor from  Georgia,  was  an  aggressive 
candidate,  and  the  Congre.ssional  caucus 
for  nominating  was  already  so  unpopular 
that  only  58  of  the  141  Republican  mem- 
bers attended  on  the  first  call.  The  in- 
fluence of  Jefferson  and  Madison,  how- 
ever, brought  118  to  a  second  meeting, 
and  Monroe,  through  the  same  influence, 
obtained  eleven  majority  over  Crawford. 
Daniel  D.  Tompkins  of  New  York  was 
named  for  Vice-President. 

For  a  time  the  discontent  seemed  omi- 
nous. Public  meetings  were  held  in  various 
parts  of  the  country  denouncing  "King 
Caucus  that  seeks  to  control  the  people  in 
the  selection  of  their  highest  oflScers."  At 
several  of  these  meetings  bitter  addresses 
were  made  by  Roger  B.  Taney,  afterward 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court.  Had 
there  been  a  strong  opposition  party, 
Monroe  might  have  been  defeated ;  but  the 
Federalists  were  so  utterly  discredited  by 
the  part  some  of  their  leaders  had  taken 
at  the  Hartford  Convention  that  their 
open  assistance  would  have  been  an  in- 
jury to  any  candidate.  The  result  was 
that  no  nomination  was  made  against 
Monroe,  and  no  national  contest  waged. 
The  presidential  electors  of  Connecticut, 
Delaware  and  Massachusetts,  34  in  all, 
cast  their  votes  for  Rufus  King  of  New 
York  and  Monroe  received  the  remaining 
183 — of  which  Indiana  furnished  three. 

This  State  had  adopted  a  Constitution 
in  June,  1816,  and  the  Legislature  had 
chosen  presidential  electors  later  on;  but 
it  was  not  admitted  into  the  Union  until 
December  17.  At  first  an  animated  dis- 
cussion was  held  as  to  whether  the  votes 
should  be  counted,  and  the  two  houses  of 
Congress  separated  to  enable  the  House 
of  Representatives  to  settle  the  question 



1  6 

of  eligibility.  No  action  was  taken,  how- 
ever, but  when  the  two  houses  again  met 
the  result  was  announced,  including  the 
vote  of  Indiana,  which  thus  cast  her  first 
presidential  vote  for  a  Jeffersonian  Re- 
publican candidate. 

Madison  retired  to  his  farm  in  Virginia 
and  interested  himself  in  agricultural  pur- 
suits. He  took  no  active  part  in  politics, 
but  when  the  South  Carolina  nullifiers 
were  quoting  his  Kentucky  and  Virginia 
resolutions  of  1798  in  justification  of  their 
nullification  and  secession  doctrines,  he 
wrote  several  powerful  letters  to  demon- 
strate the  fallacy  of  their  reasoning.  He 
died  six  days  before  the  Fourth  of  July, 

Monroe  made  John  Quincy  Adams  his 
Secretary  of  State.  During  his  adminis- 
tration of  eight  years,  two  moderately 
protective  tariffs  were  passed,  Florida 
was  annexed,  the  first  slavery  conflict  was 
adjusted  by  the  Missouri  Compromise, 
and  the  famous  "Monroe  Doctrine"  in  re- 
gard to  European  interference  with 
America  was  promulgated.  It  was  a 
period  of  recovery  from  war  and  of  gen- 
eral growth  and  prosperity.  Naturally 
cautious  and  conservative,  Monroe  had 
aroused  no  personal  antagonisms  during 
his  first  term.  A  general  assent  to  the 
principle  of  two  terms  shut  out  ambitious 
competitors  in  his  own  party,  and  the 
utter  disintegration  of  the  Federalists  had 
destroyed  outside  opposition.  The  regu- 
lar congressional  caucus  was  called  in 
1820,  but  so  few  attended  it  that  no  nomi- 
nation was  made,  and  Monroe  repeated 
the  experience  of  Washington  in  securing 
a  unanimous  electoral  vote — with  the  ex- 
ception of  one — without  either  nomina- 
tion or  election  contest.  Tompkins  was 
re-elected  Vice-President. 

In  this  election,  following  the  Indiana 
precedent,  the  electoral  vote  of  Missouri 
was  counted,  the  State  having  adopted  its 
constitution,  though  not  having  been  ad- 
mitted into  the  Union. 

Unlike  some  modern  statesmen,  Monroe 
had  served  his  country  so  unselfishly  that 
he  had  absorbed  his  private  fortune,  and 
he  left  the  oflSce  of  the  presidency  without 
means  of  support.  For  a  time  he  served 
as  justice  of  the  peace  in  Virginia,  and 
then  found  a  home  with  his  son-in-law  in 
New  York,  where  he  died  July  4,  1831.  He 
was  buried  without  ostentation,  and  his 
grave  was  left  unmarked  until  a  few  years 

The  presidential  campaign  of  1824  was 
a  personal  rather  than  a  political  contest. 
All  the  candidates  were  members  of  the 
Republican  party,  and  there  Avas  no 
declaration  of  principles,  as  it  was  as- 
sumed that  any  of  them  would  carry  out 
the  policy  of  previous  administrations. 
While  many  candidates  were  discussed, 
only  six  were  favorably  presented.  They 
were  named  by  mass  meetings  and  State 
Legislatures,  and  one,  William  H.  Craw- 
ford, by  the  discredited  Congressional 
caucus.  Of  the  six,  DeWitt  Clinton  of 
New  York,  who  had  run  against  Monroe 
in  1816,  withdrew,  and  John  C.  Calhoun 
was  transferred  to  the  list  for  Vice-Presi- 
dent. The  four  that  remained  through  the 
campaign  were  John  Quincy  Adams,  Sec- 
retary of  State;  William  H.  Crawford, 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury;  Henry  Clay, 
who  had  been  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Representatives,  and  Andrew  Jackson, 
who  had  been  United  States  Representa- 
tive and  Senator,  and  Supreme  Court 
Judge  in  his  State,  but  who,  above  all,  was 
"the  Hero  of  New  Orleans." 

The  contest  did  not  develop  any  great 
bitterness,  and  resulted  in  no  choice  for 
President,  though  Calhoun  was  almost 
unanimously  elected  Vice-President.  The 
electoral  vote  stood :  Jackson,  99 ;  Adams, 
84 ;  Crawford,  41 ;  Clay,  37.  The  election 
accordingly  went  to  the  House,  as  between 
the  three  highest  candidates.  There  the 
friends  of  Clay  helped  to  elect  Adams. 
Clay  was  made  Secretary  of  State,  and 
the  Jackson  men  charged  that  there  had 


19  16 

been  a  "deal"  in  connection  with  the  elec- 
tion. The  charge  was  denied  and  is  not 
now  believed  to  have  been  well  founded. 
But  the  bitterness  aroused  made  a  lasting 
break  between  Jackson  and  Clay,  though 
both  still  belonged  to  the  same  political 
party.  In  this  election  the  vote  of  Indiana 
both  in  the  Electoral  College  and  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  was  cast  for  the 
idolized  hero  of  New  Orleans,  Andrew 

The  administration  of  John  Quincy 
Adams  conformed  to  the  highest  type  of 
statesmanship.  He  treated  the  office  as  a 
public  trust  and  not  as  either  a  personal 
or  party  perquisite.  He  made  only  two 
dismissals  from  office,  and  both  for  good 
cause.  He  favored  internal  improvements 
more  than  did  his  predecessors,  but  that 
was  because  the  opening  and  developing 
of  the  West  had  created  greater  need  for 
them.  In  fact,  Jackson,  when  in  Con- 
gress, by  his  votes  sustained  measures  the 
same  in  principle.  It  should  not  be  for- 
gotten that  John  Quincy  Adams  was  not 
a  Federalist,  but  a  consistent  and  earnest 
supporter  of  Jefferson  and  his  policies. 
Soon  after  his  retirement  from  the  Presi- 
dency he  was  elected  to  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, where  he  continued  to  serve 
his  country  until  his  death  in  1848.  He 
literally  died  in  service,  having  been 
stricken  with  apoplexy  at  his  seat  in  the 

The  presidential  campaign  of  1828  be- 
gan almost  as  soon  as  Adams  had  been 
inaugurated,  when  the  Legislature  of  Ten- 
nessee presented  the  name  of  Jackson  as 
his  successor.  Criticisms  of  Adams'  ad- 
ministration revived  much  of  the  asperi- 
ties and  resentments  of  the  old  Republican 
and  Federalist  campaigns.  Mass  meet- 
ings and  resolutions  of  Legislatures  fol- 
lowed one  another  in  rapid  succession,  on 
the  one  hand  urging  the  election  of  Jack- 
son and  on  the  other  recommending  the 
re-election  of  Adams. 

The  campaign  soon  developed  into  a 
contest  between  the  old  party  leaders  who 
had  managed  affairs,  chosen  the  candi- 
dates and  held  the  offices,  and  a  newer, 
more  uncouth,  but  more  vigorous  element 
that  had  been  developed  with  the  growing 

The  name  Republican  was  still  retained 
by  all,  but  with  qualifying  adjectives.  The 
supporters  of  Adams  called  themselves 
National  Republicans,  while  many  of  those 
of  Jackson,  probably  having  never  heard 
of  the  obnoxious  societies  thirty  or  forty 
years  before,  took  the  name  "Democratic- 
Republican."  There  were,  however,  no 
national  conventions,  no  platforms  of 
principles,  no  declarations  of  policy.  The 
contest,  like  that  of  1824,  was  personal, 
and  the  more  common  designations  were 
"Adams  men,"  or  "Jackson  men."  The 
Jackson  men  won  by  an  electoral  vote  of 
178  to  83,  and  Calhoun  was  elected  Vice- 
President  on  the  same  ticket.  Indiana  had 
cast  her  vote  for  Jackson  and  Calhoun. 

Verification  of  the  statement  that  po- 
litical alignments  during  that  period  were 
more  personal  than  partisan  is  found  in 
the  fact  that  Indiana  gave  a  majority  for 
Jackson  in  three  successive  presidential 
elections.  In  1824  the  popular  vote  of  In- 
diana was  7,343  for  Jackson,  5,315  for 
Clay,  3,095  for  Adams.  In  1828  the  vote 
was  recorded  22,237  for  Jackson,  17,652 
for  Adams.  In  1832  Jackson  had  31,552 
and  Clay  15,472.  When,  four  years  later, 
in  1836,  the  contest  was  between  Jackson's 
favorite,  Martin  Van  Buren,  and  William 
Henry  Harrison,  the  latter  carried  the 
State  quite  decisively — 41,281  for  Harri- 
son and  32,480  for  Van  Buren.  The  same 
candidates  were  pitted  against  one  an- 
other in  1840,  and  Harrison's  majority 
over  his  competitor  was  greater  than  in 
the  preceding  election,  the  vote  being  65,- 
362  for  Harrison  and  51,695  for  Van 
Buren.  The  fact  that  General  Harrison 
had  been  Territorial  Governor  of  Indiana 
prior  to   its   admission    into    the    Union 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1 

doubtless  had  much  to  do  with  this  par- 
tiality for  the  military  candidate.  The 
fact  that  Van  Buren  was  "Jackson's  man" 
in  both  of  these  elections  did  not  have 
sufficient  weight  with  the  voting  element 
to  secure  for  him  a  majority  of  the  State's 
electorate.  In  1824  Jackson  carried  the 
State  by  a  plurality  of  only  1,928,  while 
four  years  later  his  majority  over  Adams 
was  4,585.  In  1832  Jackson  beat  Clay 
by  more  than  two  to  one — to  be  exact,  by 
a  majority  of  16,080.  The  increase  of  the 
vote  at  each  succeeding  presidential  elec- 
tion bears  eloquent  testimony  to  the  re- 
markable growth  of  population  of  the 

The  election  of  Jackson  was  partly  the 
result  and  partly  the  cause  of  a  thorough 
revolution  in  the  politics  of  the  country. 
It  was  the  culmination  of  a  change  in  po- 
litical conditions  that  had  been  going  on 
since  the  foundation  of  the  government, 
but  more  especially  since  1810,  when  the 
younger  element  took  control  of  Madison's 
administration.  In  the  older  States  suf- 
frage had  originally  been  limited  to  prop- 
erty qualifications.  In  the  new  States  it 
was  granted  to  every  white  male  of  twen- 
ty-one. In  earlier  years  presidential  elec- 
tors were  chosen  by  the  State  Legisla- 
tures, but  the  broadening  of  the  suffrage 
had  led  to  a  demand  that  the  electors  be 
chosen  directly  by  the  people;  so  that  in 
1828  they  were  so  elected  in  all  the  States 
but  one,  and  that  one.  South  Carolina.  In 
the  earlier  years,  candidates  were  named 
by  persons  already  holding  office,  or  by 
cliques  of  self-constituted  leaders,  but 
Jackson's  nomination  had  been  started  in 
mass  meetings.  In  the  earlier  years  office 
holding  had  been  confined  to  the  cultured, 
aristocratic  class,  and  though  the  term 
was  not  employed  there  was  virtually  a 
merit  or  civil  service  system  of  terms  of 
office.  Jackson's  followers  openly  de- 
manded a  share  in  the  offices,  and  many  of 
the  more  active  came  on  to  Washington  to 
secure    them.      New  men  had  also  been 

elected  to  Congress  and  the  various  State 
offices,  and  they  were  present  everywhere, 
to  the  horror  and  disgust  of  the  old  party 
leaders,  who  spoke  derisively  of  the  "tri- 
umphant reign  of  king  mob"  and  the  "mil- 
lennium of  the  minnows" — small-fry.  To 
such  there  seemed  a  fearful  chasm  be- 
tween the  life  of  1820  and  that  of  1829. 
As  one  disgusted  "patriot"  expressed  it, 
"Political  affairs  had  fallen  into  the  hands 
of  John  Holmes,  Felix  Grundy  and  the 
devil."  There  was  a  general  change  of 
federal  office  holders  all  over  the  country. 
The  test  was  not  of  party  faith  or  allegi- 
ance, for  all  were  Republicans.  No  Fed- 
eralist had  held  an  office  for  a  dozen  years. 
The  shibboleth  for  the  incumbent  applied 
alike  to  the  country  postmaster  and  the 
highest  federal  appointee,  was:  "Is  he  a 
Jackson  man?"  If  "Yes,"  he  stayed;  if 
"No,"  he  left  or  was  removed.  The  prin- 
ciple, "To  the  victors  belong  the  spoils," 
which  Jackson  proclaimed  and  vigorously 
applied,  has  no  doubt  been  grievously  mis- 
used to  the  great  detriment  of  the  coun- 
try, but  it  wrought  a  benefit  at  the  time 
by  bringing  the  government  into  closer 
sympathy  with  the  mass  of  the  people. 

The  truth  is  that  in  1829  the  people  first 
assumed  control  of  the  governmental  ma- 
chinery, which  up  to  that  time  had  been 
held  in  a  sort  of  trust  for  them  by  political 
leaders;  and  the  administration  which 
then  came  into  power  was  the  first  in  our 
history  which  represented  the  people 
without  restriction  and  which,  therefore, 
presented  not  only  the  virtues  but  the 
faults  of  the  people.  Hence,  in  every  es- 
sential this  administration  was  Demo- 
cratic— the  people  ruling. 

This  was  the  origin  of  the  great  Demo- 
cratic party  of  the  nation.  It  sprang,  in- 
deed, as  did  the  Whig  party  a  little  later, 
from  the  old  Republican  party  of  Jeffer- 
son, and  for  a  time  bore  the  hyphenated 
name,  "Democratic-Republican." 

The  formal  assumption  of  the  single 
name,  "Democrat,"  did  not,  however,  take 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1 

place  for  several  years — not,  indeed,  until 
most  of  the  old  Jeffersonian  Republicans 
had  retired  from  active  political  life.  In 
the  campaign  of  1832  the  Democratic-Re- 
publicans supported  Jackson,  and  the  Na- 
tional Republicans  Henry  Clay.  An  Anti- 
Masonic  party  was  also  in  the  field,  with 
William  Wirt  of  Maryland  as  its  candi- 
date. Jackson  received  219  electoral 
votes ;  Clay,  49 ;  Wirt,  7,  and  South  Caro- 
lina cast  11  for  John  Floyd  of  Virginia, 
who  had  not  been  a  candidate.  Wirt  got 
his  7  votes  from  Vermont. 

In  1836  the  Democratic-Republicans 
nominated  Martin  Van  Buren,  who  had 
been  Vice-President  during  Jackson's  sec- 
ond term.  The  Anti-Masons  and  part  of 
the  Whigs  named  William  Henry  Harri- 
son; another  portion  of  the  Whigs  nomi- 
nated Daniel  Webster,  and  Judge  Hugh 
L.  White  of  Tennessee  was  put  forward 
as  an  anti-Jackson  Democratic-Repub- 
lican. The  opposition  to  Van  Buren  con- 
solidated on  one  candidate  in  each  State. 
The  result  was  170  for  Van  Buren,  113  for 
the  other  three,  and  South  Carolina  again 
casting  her  11  votes  for  a  man  who  had 
not  been  a  candidate,  William  P.  Mangrun 
of  North  Carolina.  Indiana,  unmindful  of 
the  fact  that  Van  Buren  was  Jackson's 
choice,  voted  for  William  Henry  Harrison. 

By  1840  the  opposition  to  the  Demo- 
cratic-Republicans had  been  consolidated 
into  the  Whig  party.  The  former  re- 
nominated Van  Buren,  and  the  latter 
again  named  Harrison. 

For  popular  enthusiasm  the  campaign 
resembled  that  of  1828,  only  this  time  the 
enthusiasm  was  for  the  Whigs.    Harrison 

had  234  and  Van  Buren  60  electoral  votes, 
the  former  carrying  every  Northern  State 
except  Illinois  and  New  Hampshire — In- 
diana thus  going  with  the  Whigs. 

The  National  Convention  of  1844  made 
the  first  formal  use  of  the  name  "Demo- 
crat" for  the  party  really  formed  by  Jack- 
son sixteen  years  before,  and  that  name 
has  ever  since  been  retained.  It  popular- 
ly, and  very  properly,  reverts  back  to 
Jackson's  administration.  Samuel  J.  Til- 
den,  moreover,  continued  the  use  of  the 
name  Democratic-Republican  so  long  as 
he  was  chairman  of  his  party's  State  com- 
mittee prior  to  his  election  as  Governor  of 
New  York  in  1874.  In  the  following  pages 
the  Democratic  party  of  Indiana  will  be 
treated  as  dating  from  1828,  though  as  a 
matter  of  fact  Jefferson  will  ever  be 
cherished  as  the  founder  and  exponent  of 
American  Democracy.  Although  it  has 
sometimes  severely  suffered  from  the  folly 
or  selfishness  of  leaders  it  had  trusted,  and 
although  it  has  changed  the  details  of  its 
policy  to  meet  changing  conditions  in  the 
country's  development,  it  has  ever  re- 
mained fundamentally  true  to  Jefferson's 
liberal  teachings  and  Jackson's  unfalter- 
ing confidence  in  the  common  people. 

History  has  been  termed  collated  biog- 
raphy. As  this  introductory  chapter  has 
told  of  the  political  actors  and  their  deeds 
in  leading  up  to  the  formation  of  the  Na- 
tional Democratic  party,  so  the  history  of 
Indiana's  Democracy  will  be  prefaced  by 
a  sketch  of  the  activities  of  the  political 
leaders  during  the  twelve  years  that  In- 
diana did  her  part  in  the  old  Jeffersonian 
Republican  Party. 


[Chapter  II.] 



HE  woi'k  of  the  pioneers  was 
the  work  of  conquest.  It  was 
a  struggle  with  matter  whose 
subservience  to  mind  was  to 
bring  Hfe  into  soHtude  and 
make  homes  for  future  thou- 
sands. It  was  a  hand-to-hand 
conflict  with  nature,  who,  with  her  tempt- 
ing hoards  just  beyond  reach,  has  set  men 
on  the  long  and  perilous  road  toward 
perfection.  Their  mission  was  peaceful 
and  constructive,  their  immediate  goal  a 
mere  existence.  Moved  by  visions  of  ulti- 
mate victory,  they  cheerfully  made  every 
sacrifice  and  dedicated  their  lives  to  the 
long  and  doubtful  struggle.  Making 
roads,  draining  swamps  and  clearing  land 
for  agricultural  purposes  made  the  years 
one  long  stretch  of  hardship  and  toil.  The 
seasons  brought  no  respite,  but  added, 
each  in  turn,  to  the  difficulties  yet  to  over- 
come. The  conquest  of  the  soil,  the  dis- 
arming of  unseen  hostile  forces  were  for 
them  gigantic  enterprises  against  which 
their  meager  equipment  could  but  slowly 
avail.  Meadow  and  swamp  were  infested 
with  venomous  snakes  and  poisonous  in- 
sects. Malaria  and  insidious  fevers  un- 
dermined the  health  of  the  strongest. 
Physical  sufl'ering  and  unrelieved  pain 
aroused  terrors  in  the  most  confident  and 
the  bravest.  For  every  inch  of  ground  the 
wilderness  exacted  its  toll  of  human 
energj'  and  life.  Through  pain  and  suf- 
fering, childhood,  youth  and  maturity 
learned  stern  lessons  and  the  irrevocable 
laws  of  nature. 

An  accurate  delineation  of  the  persever- 
ance and  the  determination  of  the  pioneers 
and  their  faith  in  final  success  would  re- 

veal a  heroism  as  great  as  was  ever  dis- 
played on  the  battlefield.  Forest,  swamp 
and  unbroken  prairie  led  them  to  conflicts 
as  fierce  as  any  knight  ever  waged  in  sup- 
port of  his  honor  and  his  prowess.  Prac- 
tically exiled  from  all  known  civilization, 
they  worked  unselfishly  for  the  develop- 
ment of  territory  that  only  future  genera- 
tions could  enjoy.  Money,  as  a  medium  of 
exchange,  was  almost  unknown.  The 
products  of  the  field  and  dairy  went  beg- 
ging for  a  market.  The  housewife  was 
forced  to  spin  and  weave  in  order  to  pro- 
vide clothing  for  her  family.  The  forced 
existence  in  a  narrow  sphere  with  its  lim- 
ited activities  was  not  without  its  advan- 
tages. While  it  exacted  the  most  strenu- 
ous physical  toil,  it  sharpened  the  wits 
and  challenged  the  intellect  to  keener 
action.  Close  contact  with  nature  and  the 
stress  of  spiritual  conflicts  developed  char- 
acter and  heart  as  easier  conditions  could 
never  have  done.  Mutual  helpfulness  and 
unselfishness  relieved  the  rigors  of  priva- 
tion and  softened  the  grief  of  sickness  and 
death.  Never  in  the  history  of  mankind 
has  ideal  communism  become  so  nearly  a 
reality:  a  man's  word  was  his  bond;  a 
verbal  compact  stood  above  the  medium  of 
legal  execution.  Piety  was  a  common  vir- 
tue and  the  love  of  God  the  lever  of  moral- 

A  fine  sense  of  citizenship  and  civic  duty 
grew  out  of  the  individual's  attitude 
toward  work.  Every  blow  of  the  ax  in- 
voluntarily set  echoes  ringing  in  strong 
and  loyal  hearts.  The  love  of  country 
grew  with  the  consciousness  of  every  hard- 
won  possession.  Every  struggle  with 
matter  proclaimed  an  inner  growth  that 



1  6 

meant  new  life  and  new  responsibilities. 
The  pioneers  grew  in  numbers,  in  strength 
and  in  comprehension.  From  actual  ex- 
perience they  learned  the  rules  of  incipient 
statehood.  They  anticipated  the  needs  of 
future  society  and  produced  men  as  strong 
and  capable  as  the  world  has  ever  seen. 
Community  interests  resolutely  met  tested 
them  as  social,  economic  and  moral  forces. 
Time  has  proven  their  loyalty  as  citizens 
and  established  their  record  as  heroes  and 
benefactors  of  mankind. 

Need  any  one  wonder  that  these  people, 
undergoing  hardships  incomprehensible 
to  the  present  generation,  became  strong- 
ly attached  to  one  another  and  refused  to 
permit  differences  of  opinion  as  to  what 
was  then  termed  "politics"  to  disturb  their 
peaceful  relations? 


The  simple  life  of  the  Indiana  pioneers 
was  many  years  ago  happily  described  in 
an  enterprising  newspaper  published  in 
the  southeastern  part  of  the  State.  "There 
were  no  churches  in  those  days,"  wrote 
the  author.  "The  meetings  were  held  at 
private  homes.  The  people  then  did  not 
go  to  church  to  display  their  finery.  The 
men  at  these  private  home  meetings  wore 
jeans,  while  the  women  wore  flannel.  A 
calico  dress  was  a  rarity  indeed.  The 
preachers  were  muscular  Christians,  who 
pointed  men  to  salvation  through  love  of 
their  race  rather  than  because  they  re- 
ceived a  good  salary  for  doing  so.  Their 
salaries  were  but  $50  to  $75,  and  on  these 
meager  sums  they  endured  great  hard- 
ships with  Christian  fortitude.  Often 
they  sacrificed  their  lives  in  their  work. 
In  those  days  the  Indian  squaws  took  a 
deep  interest  in  the  household  affairs  of 
the  whites  and  they  made  the  lives  of  the 
housewives  miserable  by  begging  for  cu- 
cumbers. The  houses  of  the  first  settlers 
were  log  cabins,  with  generally  but  one 
room.  The  man  who  could  live  in  a  hewed 
log  house  was  considered    an    aristocrat. 

These  rough  homes  boasted  of  but  few 
window  lights  and  greased  paper  was  used 
instead  of  glass." 


Many  characterizations  of  the  early  set- 
tlers have  been  penned  and  printed.  Glow- 
ing tributes  are  the  rule;  carping  criti- 
cisms the  exception.  Among  those  who 
have  enjoyed  excellent  opportunities  to 
institute  comparisons  there  is  substantial 
agreement  that  as  a  portrayal  of  pioneer 
life  in  Indiana  this  picture,  drawn  by 
David  Turpie,  stands  unrivalled  and  un- 
excelled : 

"What  may  be  called  the  modern  history 
of  our  State  began  on  the  day  when  Gen- 
eral Clark  set  out  from  the  falls  of  the 
Ohio  upon  his  famous  expedition  against 
Vincennes.  That  expedition  and  its  for- 
tunate result  first  revealed  to  the  people 
of  Virginia  and  the  Atlantic  States  the 
resources  of  the  immense  region,  well- 
watered,  fertile  and  arable,  that  lay  in  the 
territory  of  the  Northwest.  The  country 
was  not  known  before,  but  it  was  un- 
noticed. The  exodus,  long  continued, 
which  followed  this  revelation,  attested 
its  value  and  reality.  The  migration  to 
Indiana  during  the  closing  years  of  the 
eighteenth  and  the  beginning  of  the  next 
century,  in  some  respects  has  had  few 
parallels  in  the  world's  history.  It  was 
not  like  that  of  the  ancient  Phenicians  to 
Carthage  and  northern  Africa,  or  that  of 
the  Greeks  to  the  shores  of  the  Euxine, 
or  of  the  Romans  to  Spain  and  Britain — 
still  less  did  it  resemble  that  of  the  Eng- 
lish to  the  tidewater  regions  of  Massachu- 
setts, Virginia  and  the  Carolinas. 

"All  these  colonists  in  their  removal  still 
retained  and  enjoyed  the  means  of  com- 
munication and  commercial  intercourse 
with  the  kindred  and  countrymen  whom 
they  had  left  behind  them.  But  the  immi- 
grants to  the  country  now  called  Indiana, 
in  that  early  period  spoken  of,  having 
passed  the  last  military  outpost  on  their 
way  and  gone  thence  into  the  depths  of 
the  wilderness,  were  as  wholly  severed 
from  the  world  as  Columbus  when  he 
sailed  upon  his  first  voyage  into  the  un- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191G 

known  waters  of  the  Western  ocean.  They 
were  in  a  condition  of  extreme,  almost 
total,  isolation.  They  made  their  home  in 
the  midst  of  a  vast  forest,  for  the  most 
part  unexplored  and  uninhabited  save  by 
roving  bands  of  Indians,  equipped  with 
weapons  far  more  deadly  than  those  of 
the  chiefs  and  warriors  who,  more  than  a 
hundred  years  before,  had  attempted  with 
their  clubs,  bows  and  arrows,  to  exter- 
minate the  white  settlements  in  the  val- 
leys of  the  Potomac  and  Connecticut. 
Whether  the  pioneer  settler  reaped,  plowed 
or  planted,  his  rifle  must  be  within  reach. 
Solitude  seldom  broken,  danger  always 
imminent,  shadowed  his  daily  life  and 

"Plutarch  observes  that  those  who 
found  prosperous  States  and  communities 
are  more  worthy  of  praise  and  com- 
mendation than  any  other  benefactors  of 
the  human  race.  Yet  it  has  been  some- 
what the  fashion,  both  in  writing  and  con- 
versation, to  decry  the  pioneers  and  early 
settlers  of  our  State  as  being  generally 
coarse,  ignorant,  lawless  and  violent.  The 
founders  of  Indiana  were,  for  the  most 
part,  immigrants  from  the  thirteen  origin- 
al States,  and  they  came  hither  in  nearly 
equal  proportion  from  the  North  and 
South.  They  were  the  best  element  of 
that  hardy  population  which  inhabited  the 
long  line  of  the  old  Colonial  frontier  ex- 
tending from  Maine  to  Georgia.  Some  of 
them  were  men  of  intellectual  attainments 
and  of  classic  education,  everywhere  wel- 
comed and  recognized  as  leaders  in  the 
new  community.  The  much  greater  num- 
ber were  actuated  by  one  dominant  pur- 
pose, one  salient  ambition;  this  was  to 
make  for  themselves  and  for  their  house- 
hold larger  and  better  homes.  These  pio- 
neers in  emigration,  leaving  their  former 
domiciles,  did  not  leave  behind  them  their 
respect  for  law  and  order,  their  reverence 
for  religion,  or  their  love  of  civil  and 
political  liberty.  All  these  they  carried 
with  them  upon  their  journey.  The  early 
legislation  and  the  first  constitution  of  our 
State  show  in  every  line  and  sentence  of 
the  venerable  text  how  thoroughly  they 
were  imbued  with  those  principles. 

"These  predecessors  in  our  goodly  her- 
itage had  the  courage  to  leave  a  land  of 
comparative  comfort  and  security;  forti- 
tude to  endure  the  hardships  and  dangers 
incident   to   such   departure,   self-reliance 

constant  and  unwavering,  a  fixity  of  pur- 
pose and  integrity  of  life,  which  upheld 
their  hands  and  hopes  in  what  they  had 
undertaken.  They  were  a  thoughtful 
people,  slow  to  anger,  quick  neither  to 
take  nor  to  give  offense,  but  prompt  to 
resent  insult  or  injury  when  offered.  They 
were  diligent  in  their  work — but  took  their 
time  in  doing  it ;  they  depended  more  than 
we  do  upon  the  morrow  for  its  completion, 
but  they  did  complete  it.  They  were  very 
frank  in  conversation,  kindly  in  social  in- 
tercourse. Their  manner  of  speech  was 
plain,  direct — to  use  their  own  phrase, 
home-spoken,  but  without  coarseness  or 

"Many  of  these  patriarchs  had  unique 
personal  histories  and  gifts  of  description 
and  narration  quite  remarkable;  and  if 
their  stories  were  long,  they  were  eagerly 
listened  to,  on  account  of  the  manifest 
good  faith  and  verity  of  the  narrator. 
They  were  a  very  religious  community,  yet 
without  the  least  trace  of  superstition. 
Possessed  of  lively  imaginative  powers, 
they  might  have  peopled  the  wide  expanse 
of  wood  and  waters  around  them  with 
elves  and  fairies,  nymphs  and  naiads ;  but 
they  looked  in  the  woods  only  for  game 
or  Indians,  and  saw  only  what  they  looked 

"Nevertheless,  they  walked  not  by 
sight  alone.  They  cherished  a  faith  sin- 
cere and  simple,  unobscured  by  the  mirage 
of  the  higher  criticism.  Nearly  all  of 
them  belonged  to  some  church  communion ; 
there  was  much  difference  of  opinion  on 
these  subjects,  but  this  caused  no  breach 
of  brotherly  kindness  or  of  neighborly 
good  will  and  courtesy.  The  creed  and 
form  of  worship  were  as  free  as  thought 
itself.  Not  a  few  of  these  men  in  the 
vanguard  of  civilization  were  very  illiter- 
ate, being  able  neither  to  read  nor  write ; 
yet  they  were  not  uneducated.  They  had 
learned  some  of  the  lessons  of  life  and 
knew  them  better  than  the  savants  of 
Oxford  or  Cambridge,  or  the  Pilgrim 
Fathers,  with  all  their  erudition.  They 
had  in  a  very  free  way  wrought  out  their 
destiny  in  the  wilderness.  Mental,  moral, 
political  independence  was  their  birth- 

"Our  forefathers  dwelling  under  the 
sky  of  the  West  were  a  chosen  people  who, 
without  the  visible  guidance  of  the  cloud 
or  pillar,  made  a  Christian  solution  of  the 

(23  ) 


-  1 

problem  that  for  ages  had  embroiled  their 
ancestors  in  bloodiest  warfare.  Even  in 
the  infancy  of  this  commonwealth  or  in 
the  days  of  its  youth  and  inexperience, 
there  was  no  religious  test  either  for  office 
or  the  franchise.  No  Baptist  was  ban- 
ished, no  Quaker  was  scourged  or  held  in 
durance,  but  every  one  worshiped  God 
according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  con- 
science. If  any  man  forbore  either  to  be- 
lieve or  worship,  he  incurred  thereby  no 
statutory  pains  or  penalties.  The  founders 
of  our  State  passed  beyond  the  line  of 
mere  religious  toleration;  they  eliminated 
from  their  form  of  policy  both  persecution 
and  its  victim,  and  provided  that  martyr- 
dom should  be  a  thing  impossible.  They 
relied  upon  the  utmost  freedom  of  speech 
and  opinion  as  the  best  safeguard  of  truth 
and  the  surest  correction  of  error.  They 
gave  no  credence  to  the  doctrine  that  the 
growth  of  religious  sentiment  should  be 
accompanied  by  some  sort  of  proscription 
of  dissent,  or  that  as  faith  waxed  stronger, 
charity  should  cease  or  fail.  Greater  was 
the  charity  of  our  fathers,  even  as  their 
faith  more  abounded. 

"The  ancient  provisions  of  the  ordi- 
nance of  1787,  touching  common  school 
education  and  involuntary  servitude,  al- 
though for  a  long  period  the  subjects  of 
active  controversy,  were  faithfully  ad- 
hered to  and  loyally  maintained. 

"In  the  beginning  of  our  social  and  civil 
organization  those  who  attended  meetings 
of  anj'  kind  always  went  armed.  An  aged 
judge,  speaking  of  this,  told  me  that  in 
his  youth  the  courtroom  during  term  bore 
the  appearance  of  a  military  post;  wit- 
nesses, parties,  jurymen  and  bystanders 
brought  with  them  their  guns  and  ac- 
coutrements. I  have  seen,  several  times, 
on  the  walls  of  old  meeting  houses,  rem- 
nants of  the  wooden  hooks,  upon  which, 
during  the  hours  of  worship,  the  rifles  of 
those  present  were  hung,  loaded  and 
primed,  ready  for  instant  use.  These  pre- 
cautions were  taken  against  attack  by  the 
Indians,  which  was  often  sudden  and  un- 
expected. Still,  a  habit  so  constantly  in 
use  must  have  had  a  marked  effect  upon 
the  m.anners  of  the  people.  It  largely  con- 
duced to  the  observance  of  the  true 
civilities  of  life,  to  mutual  respect  and 
deference,  whether  in  public  or  private  in- 

"Among  brave  men  thus  equipped,  who 
met  together  for  any  purpose,  there  was 
a  savor  of  knightly  bearing  shown  in  the 
considerate  regard  paid  to  the  feelings  and 
wishes,  even  to  the  prejudices  and  pre- 
possessions, of  their  comrades  and  asso- 
ciates. Utterances  of  indiscretion  and 
violence,  in  this  armed  presence  were 
quietly  suppressed;  the  cost  of  the  feud 
was  counted,  its  consequences  were 
weighed  and  measured,  restrained  and 

"The  native  chivalry  of  the  frontiers- 
man, though  it  may  have  been  unpolished 
and  uncouth,  had  yet  a  real  origin  and 
meaning.  Its  influence  was  felt  percept- 
ibly long  after  the  custom  of  bearing  arms, 
once  so  general,  had  become  obsolete. 

"In  that  primitive  age  there  was  an 
innate  honest  simplicity  of  manners,  as 
of  thought  and  action.  Fraud,  wrongdoing 
and  injustice  were  denounced  as  they  are 
at  present ;  they  were  also  discredited,  dis- 
honored, and  branded  with  an  ostracism 
more  severe  than  that  of  Athens.  Wealth 
acquired  by  such  means  could  not  evade, 
and  was  unable  to  conceal,  the  stigma  that 
attached  to  the  hidden  things  of  dis- 

"The  moral  atmosphere  of  the  time  was 
clear  and  bracing ;  it  repelled  specious  pre- 
tensions, resisted  iniquity  and  steadily  re- 
jected the  evil  which  calls  itself  good. 
Moreover,  there  never  has  been  a  people 
who  wrought  into  the  spirit  of  their  public 
enactments  the  virtues  of  their  private 
character  more  completely  than  the  early 
settlers  of  Indiana.  We  have  grown  up 
in  the  shadow  of  their  achievements; 
these  need  not  be  forgotten  in  the  splendor 
of  our  own." 


As  already  indicated,  party  relationship 
was  in  the  "good  old  days"  subject  to  sud- 
den and  frequent  changes.  In  the  absence 
of  clearly  defined  appellations,  men  who 
"dabbled  in  politics"  were  designated  as 
Adams  men,  Jacksonites,  Harrisonites, 
Smithites  or  Jonesites — dependent  on  who 
was  up  for  assignment  to  public  position. 
So  confusing  had  become  the  party  labels 
temporarily  and  shiftingly  applied  that  a 



critical  contributor  to  one  of  the  more 
prominent  newspapers  of  that  period  let 
himself  loose  in  this  fashion : 

"I  have  been  pestered  of  late  by  many 
new  and  uncommon  phrases  and  some  old 
words  with  new  meanings  to  them,  which 
many  of  the  candidates  have  lugged  into 
their  handbills  and  public  speeches;  such 
as  'Jackson  Republican,'  'Whole-Hog  Jack- 
son man,'  'Republican  of  the  Jefferson 
School,'  'Patriot,'  'Hero,'  'Statesman,' 
'Tried  Republican,'  'Federalist.'  I  have 
taken  great  pains  to  find  out  the  meaning 
of  these  words  and  phrases  and  I  believe 
I  have  at  last  nearly  mastered  the  subject. 
The  following  is  the  vocabulary  of  the 
words  in  their  present  acceptation : 

Jackson  Republican:  An  old  Federalist  who 
supports  Gen.  Jackson  for  the  office  which  he  has 
gotten  or  hopes  to  get. 

Whole-Hog  Jackson  Man:  A  fiery  tempered 
person  who  has  no  opinion  of  his  own,  but  votes, 
praises,  censures  and  turns  just  as  he  is  bidden 
by  his  county  caucus. 

Republican  of  Jefferson  School:  A  man  who 
always  joins  the  strong  party  and  swears  he  never 

Patriot:  A  man  who  can  live  by  his  own  trade, 
but  wants  the  public  to  support  him. 

Hero:     Anybody  who  has  fought  a  duel. 

Statesman:  A  man  who  knows  how  many 
States  there  are  in  the  Union  and  can  tell  their 

Federalist:  Everybody  who  is  against  my  elec- 

The  Party:  Five  or  six  office  hunters  in  each 
county  who  teach  the  sovereigns  how  they  ought 
to  vote. 

The  Good  Cause:  My  cause.  My  plan  of  get- 
ting into  office. 

"But  the  phrase  which  perplexed  me  is 
'Tried  Republican.'  When  I  hear  a  man 
say  he  means  to  vote  for  a  'tried  Re- 
publican' I  am  astonished  and  disposed  to 
ask  him  what  he  will  have  him  tried  for 
— treason,  felony  or  breach  of  the  peace? 

"When  the  new-fangled  doctrine  of 
nullification  shall  be  attempted  to  be  put 
into  practice  we  shall  no  doubt  see  many 
'tried  Republicans'  and  not  a  few  of  them 
condemned  and  executed." 


As  far  back  as  1799  the  General  As- 
sembly of  the  Northwest  Territory  met  at 
Cincinnati  in  the  month  of  September  and 
was  addressed  by  Governor  St.  Clair.  He 
called  attention  to  the  necessity  of  mak- 
ing provision  for  and  the  regulation  of  the 
lives  and  morals  of  the  present  and  rising 
generation  in  the  territory  and  the  neces- 
sity of  providing  for  the  repression  of 
vice  and  immorality  throughout  the  big 
stretch  of  country.  He  declared  that  steps 
should  be  immediately  taken  for  the  pro- 
tection of  virtue  and  innocence,  "for,"  said 
he,  "the  security  of  property  and  the 
punishment  of  crime  is  a  sublime  employ- 
ment. Every  aid  in  my  power,"  he  con- 
tinued, "will  be  afforded,  and  I  hope  we 
shall  bear  in  mind  that  the  character  and 
deportment  of  the  people  and  their  happi- 
ness here  and  hereafter  depend  very  much 
upon  the  spirit  and  genius  of  their  laws." 
Among  the  laws  enacted  as  the  result  of 
this  appeal  was  an  act  to  stop  Sabbath- 
breaking,  another  to  stop  profane  swear- 
ing, dueling,  cock  fighting,  running  horses 
on  the  public  highways  and  gambling  at 
billiards,  cards,  dice,  shovelboard,  etc. 
The  whipping  post  and  the  pillory  were 

[Chapter  III.] 


(December  11,   1816) 


EARING  on  this  subject,  vol- 
umes have  been  written  and 
printed,  with  elaborate  details 
of  incidents  illustrative  of  the 
trials  and  tribulations  of  the 
early  settlers.  All  of  these 
writings  and  narratives  are 
exceedingly  interesting  and  instructive. 
In  epitomized  form  the  story  has,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  writer,  never  been  more 
comprehensively  told  than  was  done  by 
Senator  Daniel  W.  Voorhees  in  a  notable 
address  delivered  by  him  on  the  Fourth  of 
July,  1883.  The  readers  of  this  volume 
will  be  delighted  with  the  illuminating 
manner  in  which  that  famous  orator  nar- 
rated the  circumstances  and  conditions  un- 
der which  Indiana  was  admitted  into  the 
Union  in  the  year  1816: 

"It  was  on  the  fourth  of  July  in  the  year 
1800  when  'The.  Indiana  Territory'  was 
organized  under  Congressional  enactment, 
embracing  'all  that  part  of  the  territory 
of  the  United  States  northwest  of  the  Ohio 
river  which  lies  to  the  westward  of  a  line 
beginning  at  the  Ohio,  opposite  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Kentucky  river,  and  runnmg 
thence  to  Fort  Recovery,  and  thence  north 
until  it  shall  intersect  the  territorial  line 
between  the  United  States  and  Canada.' 
The  region  thus  deiined  by  boundaries 
comprised  all  of  the  States  of  Indiana  and 
Illinois,  and  the  larger  portion  of  the  State 
of  Michigan,  and  yet  within  all  this  vast 
domain  the  civilized  population  was  esti- 
mated at  but  4,875,  less  than  the  basis  of 
1,000  voters.  It  was  the  organization  of 
a  giant  wilderness  through  whose  mighty 
depths  stalked  the  painted  and  plumed  bar- 
barian in  the  haughty  supremacy  of  his 
power.     Here  and  there  a  feeble  and  scant 

ray  of  civilization  had  penetrated  this 
widespread  abode  of  savage  life.  Like  a 
small  lamp  in  a  great  darkness,  the  settle- 
ment at  Vincennes  had  been  throwing  its 
feeble  but  steady  and  serene  light  on  the 
surrounding  night  for  nearly  a  hundred 
years.  According  to  reliable  history,  civ- 
ilized man  first  took  up  his  abode  at  the 
old  post  in  1710,  sixty-five  years  before  the 
first  guns  of  the  Revolution  were  fired,  and 
ninety  years  before  the  Indiana  Territory 
was  created  by  act  of  Congress.  But  there 
had  been  no  growth  or  expansion  at  the 
post,  as  the  meager  population  of  the  en- 
tire territory  in  1800  amply  proves.  It 
had  been  as  stationary  as  its  name  implied. 
In  1805  the  Territory  of  Michigan  was  or- 
ganized and  separated  from  the  Indiana 
Territory,  and  finally,  by  act  of  Congress, 
February  3,  1809,  the  Indiana  Territory 
was  again  divided  by  setting  off  all  that 
part  lying  west  of  the  Wabash  River  and 
a  direct  line  drawn  from  the  said  Wabash 
River  and  Post  Vincennes  due  north  to  the 
territorial  line  between  the  United  States 
and  Canada,  to  be  known  as  the  Territory 
of  Illinois.  In  1808,  a  year  prior  to  this 
final  division,  we  find  an  enumeration  of 
the  white  population  of  the  Indiana  Terri- 
tory, there  being  about  nineteen  thousand 
inhabitants  in  that  portion  which  is  now 
the  State  of  Indiana,  and  about  eleven 
thousand  in  that  portion  now  the  State  of 

"The  early  stages  of  progress  in  the 
Northwest  were  not  swift  nor  easy;  they 
were  slow  and  painful  and  the  life  of  the 
pioneer  was  full  of  toil,  privation  and 
peril.  Emigration  from  the  old  States 
was  reluctant  to  seek  new  fields  of  enter- 
prise, environed  as  they  were  by  every 
danger  which  fact  or  fancy  could  present 
to  the  mind.  Settlers  came  in  slowly  and 
tediously  over  roads  of  their  own  construc- 
tion.    When   Indiana  was  admitted  as  a 



-19  16 

State  into  the  Union,  after  sixteen  years 
of  important  territorial  government,  after 
the  battles  of  Fort  Harrison  and  Tippe- 
canoe had  been  fought,  after  the  battle  of 
New  Orleans,  and  the  treaty  of  peace  with 
Great  Britain  at  the  close  of  the  war  of 
1812,  with  the  Indian  titles  nearly  all  ex- 
tinguished, and  the  Mississippi  River  and 
all  its  tributaries  opened  to  the  unmolested 
trade  and  commerce  of  the  American  peo- 
ple, she  yet  showed  by  a  census  then  taken 
a  population  of  only  63,897.  There  were 
but  thirteen  organized  counties,  and  Knox 
headed  the  list  with  8,068  inhabitants. 
Then  came  Franklin,  Washington,  Clark, 
Harrison,  Wayne,  Gibson,  Dearborn,  Jef- 
ferson, Switzerland,  Perry,  Posey  and 
Warrick  in  the  order  I  have  named  them. 

"And  what  a  small,  tame  affair  the  first 
gubernatorial  election  appears  to  us  as  we 
look  at  it  from  this  distance  and  compare 
it  with  some  other  Indiana  elections  which 
we  have  known!  At  a  general  election 
held  on  the  first  Monday  in  August,  1816, 
for  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  Rep- 
resentative in  Congress,  members  of  the 
General  Assembly  and  the  various  county 
officers,  calling  out  a  full  vote,  Jonathan 
Jennings  received  5,211  votes  and  was 
elected  Governor  over  Thomas  Posey,  who 
received  3,934  votes.  With  less  than  10,- 
000  voters  to  persuade,  and  only  thirteen 
county  seats  to  visit,  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that  some  of  my  friends  in  both  parties 
would  rather  have  had  such  a  race  for 
Governor  than  the  one  they  are  likely  to 
be  engaged  in  twelve  months  hence. 

"In  the  convention  which  framed  the 
first  constitution  of  Indiana  there  were 
forty-three  members,  and  it  is  both  curious 
and  pleasant  to  find  so  many  names  in  that 
body  which  have  remained  familiar  to  the 
people  of  Indiana  at  every  stage  of  her 
subsequent  history.  Jonathan  Jennings 
was  its  president  and  William  Hendricks 
its  secretary;  each  of  whom  soon  after- 
ward served  the  infant  State  as  Governor 
and  as  Senator  in  Congress.  James  Noble 
was  also  there,  and  Enoch  McCarty,  Rob- 
ert Hanna,  John  DePauw,  John  Badaliet. 
Samuel  Milroy,  Joseph  Holman,  David  H. 
Maxwell  and  others,  whose  honored  names 
adorn  the  annals  of  the  State.  A  careful 
and  competent  historian  of  that  period  has 
spoken  as  follows  of  those  who  first  here 
laid  the  foundations  of  a  great  and  power- 
ful commonwealth : 

The  convention  that  formed  the  first  constitu- 
tion of  Indiana  was  composed  mainly  of  clear-  1 
minded,  unpretending  men  of  common  sense,  | 
whose  patriotism  was  unquestionable  and  whose 
morals  were  fair.  Their  familiarity  %vith  the  the- 
ories of  the  Declaration  of  American  Indepen- 
dence; their  territorial  experience  under  the  pro- 
visions of  the  ordinance  of  1787,  and  their  knowl- 
edge of  the  principles  of  the  constitution  of  the  j 
United  States  were  sufficient,  when  combined,  to 
lighten  materially  their  labors  in  the  great  work 
of  forming  a  constitution  for  a  new  State.  .  .  . 
In  the  clearness  and  conciseness  of  its  style,  in  the 
comprehensive  and  just  provisions  which  it  made 
for  the  maintenance  of  civil  and  religious  liberty, 
in  its  mandates,  which  were  designed  to  protect 
the  rights  of  the  people,  collectively  and  individ- 
ually, and  to  provide  for  the  public  welfare,  the 
constitution  that  was  formed  for  Indiana  in  1816 
was  not  inferior  to  any  of  the  State  constitutions 
which  were  in  existence  at  that  time. 

"And  with  this  constitution  for  the 
guidance  and  welfare  of  her  people,  In- 
diana was  admitted  into  the  full  fellowship 
of  the  Union  December  11,  1816,  and  un- 
der these  bright  auspices  began  her  un- 
paralleled career  as  a  State. 

"There  was  but  little  reading  matter  in 
the  pioneer  settlements.  The  first  news- 
paper in  all  that  vast  region  now  compris- 
ing Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan  and  Wis- 
consin, was  the  Western  Sun,  at  Vin- 
cennes,  published  by  Elihu  Stout.  In  its 
columns  the  young  and  the  old  of  that  day 
eagerly  scanned  the  sayings  and  doings  of 
those  who  were  entrusted  with  public  af- 
fairs. No  other  people  are  so  deeply  in- 
terested in  good  government  as  those  who 
are  not  yet  strong,  rich  and  self-reliant. 
In  consequence  of  this  fact  the  inhabitants 
of  the  frontiers  at  every  stage  of  Ameri- 
can history  have  been  vigilant  obsen'ers 
of  their  public  servants." 


It  is  quite  evident  from  the  data  at  hand 
that  with  the  growth  of  population  in  In- 
diana during  the  sixteen  years  preceding 
its  admission  into  the  Union  came  a  class 
of  men  eminently  fitted  to  manage  the  af- 
fairs of  the  infant  commonwealth  and 
worthily  to  represent  it  in  the  halls  of 

Excellent  judgment  appears  to  have 
been  exercised  by  the  electorate  to  choose 
men  of  high  character  and  eminent  ability 
to  serve  the  State  both  at  home  and  at 



Washington.  Thus,  a  good  beginning  was 
made  in  the  ministration  of  public  affairs. 

As  intelligently  and  comprehensively 
narrated  by  the  painstaking  State  histo- 
rian, William  Henry  Smith,  "an  election 
was  ordered  for  choosing  delegates  to 
frame  and  promulgate  a  constitution,  and 
for  the  election  of  a  Governor."  The  two 
opposing  candidates  for  Governor  were 
Thomas  Posey  and  Jonathan  Jennings, 
then  a  delegate  in  Congress.  The  election 
was  held  on  the  first  Monday  of  August, 
and  Mr.  Jennings  was  elected  Governor, 
Christopher  Harrison  Lieutenant-Govern- 
or, and  William  Hendricks  member  of 

The  vote  for  Governor  in  1816  stood : 


Jonathan  Jennings   5,211 

Thomas  Posey   3,934 

Total    9,145 


Christopher  Harrison 6,570 

John  Vawter  847 

Abel  Finley  18 

John  Johnson  14 

Davis  Floyd   13 

Amos  Lane   12 

Total   7,474 

Although  the  State  was  not  finally  ad- 
mitted into  the  Union  until  December  11, 
the  first  Legislature  elected  under  the  new 
constitution  began  its  session  on  the  7th 
of  November,  when  Jonathan  Jennings 
took  the  oath  of  office  as  Governor.  By  the 
terms  of  the  constitution  Governors  were 
elected  for  a  term  of  three  years,  and  the 
other  State  officers,  with  the  exception  of 
Lieutenant-Governor,  were  chosen  by  the 

Governor  Jennings,  in  his  opening  mes- 
sage to  the  General  Assembly,  said : 

"The  result  of  your  deliberations  will  be 
considered  as  indicative  of  the  future  char- 
acter of  the  State,  as  well  as  of  the  future 
happiness  of  its  citizens.  The  reputation 
of  the  State,  as  well  as  its  highest  inter- 
est, will  require  that  a  just  and  generous 

policy  toward  the  general  movement,  and 
a  due  regard  to  the  rights  of  its  members 
respectively,  should  invariably  have  their 
proper  influence.  In  the  commencement 
of  the  State  government  the  shackles  of 
the  colonial  should  not  be  forgotten  in  our 
limited  exertions  to  prove,  by  happy  ex- 
perience, that  a  uniform  adherence  to  the 
first  principles  of  our  government,  and  a 
virtuous  exercise  of  its  powers,  will  best 
secure  efficiency  to  its  measures  and  sta- 
bility to  its  character.  Without  a  frequent 
recurrence  to  those  principles,  the  admin- 
istration of  the  government  will  impercep- 
tibly become  more  and  more  arduous,  until 
the  simplicity  of  our  republican  institu- 
tions may  eventually  be  lost  in  dangerous 
expedients  and  political  designs.  Under 
every  free  government  the  happiness  of 
the  citizens  must  be  identified  with  their 
morals;  and  while  a  constitutional  exer- 
cise of  their  rights  shall  continue  to  have 
its  due  weight  in  the  discharge  of  the  du- 
ties required  of  the  constitutional  authori- 
ties of  the  State,  too  much  attention  can- 
not be  bestowed  to  the  encouragement  and 
promotion  of  every  moral  virtue,  and  to 
the  enactment  of  laws  calculated  to  re- 
strain the  vicious  and  pi'escribe  punish- 
ment for  every  crime  commensurate  to  its 
enormity.  In  measuring,  however,  to  each 
crime  its  adequate  punishment  it  will  be 
well  to  recollect  that  the  certainty  of  pun- 
ishment has  generally  the  surest  effect  to 
prevent  crime;  while  punishments  unnec- 
essarily severe  too  often  produce  the  ac- 
quittal of  the  guilty,  and  disappoint  one 
of  the  great  objects  of  legislation  and  good 
government.  .  .  .  The  dissemination 
of  useful  knowledge  will  be  indispensably 
necessary  as  a  support  of  morals,  and  as 
a  restraint  of  vice;  and  on  this  subject  it 
will  only  be  necessary  to  direct  your  atten- 
tion to  the  plan  of  education  as  prescribed 
by  the  constitution." 

Mr.  Jennings  served  as  Governor  for 
six  years,  and  during  his  administration 
the  Legislature  mainly  directed  its  efforts 
to  putting  on  the  full  habiliments  of  State- 
hood. Among  its  first  duties  was  that  of 
filling  the  other  State  offices  and  electing 
two  members  of  the  United  States  Senate. 
Robert  A.  New  was  elected  Secretary  of 
State,  W.  H.  Lilly,  Auditor,  and  Daniel  C. 
Lane,  Treasurer.     James  Noble  and  Wal- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

ler  Taylor  were  chosen  Senators.  The  In  increasing  the  State's  revenue  the  Gov- 
laws  were  codified  and  made  applicable  to  ernor  met  with  many  difficulties.  The  ob- 
the  State  government.  A  number  of  laws  jects  of  taxation  were  not  numerous  and 
were  passed  on  various  subjects;  courts  the  great  scarcity  of  money  in  the  State 
were  established  and  their  jurisdiction  de-  made  it  difficult  for  the  collector  to  realize 
fined,  and  the  Bank  of  Vincennes  was  on  the  demands  of  the  State  upon  the  prop- 
adopted  as  a  State  bank  and  was  author-  erty  that  was  assessed.  In  the  next  year 
ized  to  establish  a  number  of  branches,  the  problem  had  become  so  acute  that  Gov- 
Commissioners  were  also  appointed  to  se-  ernor  Jennings  said  that  in  order  to  en- 
lect  a  site  for  the  permanent  capital  of  force  the  payments  of  the  revenue  of  the 
the  State.  The  slavery  question  continued  State  on  the  part  of  those  charged  with 
to  give  considerable  concern.  Notwith-  the  collections  he  recommended  that  all 
standing  involuntary  servitude  had  been  suits  connected  therewith  be  instituted  in 
forbidden  by  the  ordinance  of  1787,  and  the  Harrison  Circuit  Court  and  that  the 
again  by  the  State  constitution,  slaves  appointment  of  an  Attorney-General  be  au- 
were  openly  held,  and  efforts  were  contin-  thorized  by  law  whose  duty  it  should  be  to 
ued  to  introduce  slavery  under  the  dis-  prosecute  such  cases, 
guise  of  apprentices.  In  his  first  message  The  second  State  election,  in  1819,  shows 
to  the  Legislature,  Governor  Jennings  thus  this  result : 
referred  to  the  subject : 


"I  recommend  to  your  consideration  the 

propriety  of  providing  by  law,  to  prevent  iT-"]. ''^""'"^.^ Hf 

more  effectually  any  unlawful  attempts  to  Christopher  Harrison 2,007 

seize  and  carry  into  bondage  persons  of  Samuel  Carr 80 

color,  legally  entitled    to    their  freedom ;  ^^^er  Allen i 

and,  at  the  same  time,  as  far  as  practica-  yor  LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR 
ble,  to  prevent  those  who  rightfully  owe 

service  to  the  citizens  of  any  other  State  ^^^''^  So°"  '^'i^O 

or  territory  from  seeking  within  the  lim-  '^°^^  DePauw 3,422 

its  of  this  State  a  refuge  from  the  posses-  J^™^^  McKmght 5 

sion  of  their  lawful  owners.     Such  a  meas-  °«""'^  Pennington 2 

ure  vdll  tend  to  secure  those  who  are  free  Christopher  Harrison 2 

from  any  unlawful  attempts   (to  enslave  Abraham  Markle 2 

them)  and  secure  the  rights  of  the  citizens  mu            a.-        j?  •  ^        i  • 

of  the  other  States  and  territories  as  far  ^he  question  of  mtemal  improvements 

as  ought  reasonably  be  respected."  also  occupied  the  attention  of  the  Legis- 

In  a  speech  delivered  by  Governor  Jen-  ^^^ure  during  the  administration  of  Gov- 
nings  in  the  month  of  August,  1817,  atten-  ^^'^^  Jennings.  The  State  was  rapidly 
tion  was  directed  to  the  need  of  greater  ^"'"^  "P  ^^^^  popu  ation,  but  the  lack  of 
educational  facilities  in  the  State,  the  ne-  "^^^"^  ^o  transport  the  surplus  products  to 
cessity  for  a  revision  of  the  statutes,  the  "^^^^^^  ^^«  delaying  immigration.  No 
need  for  the  organization  of  the  judiciary  ^o^^s  had  been  built  anywhere  in  the 
and  of  a  law  to  prevent  the  carrying  into  State,  except  a  few  that  had  only  been 
bondage  of  persons  of  color  residing  in  the  cleared  of  the  trees,  and  the  settlements 
State  and  legally  entitled  to  their  freedom,  were  still  largely  confined  to  the  neighbor- 
He  also  urged  the  necessity  of  raising  the  hood  of  water  courses.  In  August,  1822, 
State's  revenue  to  a  sufficient  amount  to  before  the  expiration  of  his  second  term, 
meet  the  expenses  of  the  year  and  to  pay  Governor  Jennings  was  elected  to  Con- 
the  debt  consequent  upon  holding  the  con-  gress  from  the  Second  district,  and  the 
stitutional  convention  of  the  previous  year,  unexpired  portion  of  his  term  as  Governor 



19  16 

was  filled  by  Lieutenant-Governor  Ratliff 
Boon.  Governor  Jennings's  resignation 
was  dated  September  12,  1822. 

It  is  vi'orthy  of  note  that  the  first  Con- 
gressman from  the  newly-admitted  State 
of  Indiana  was  William  Hendricks,  an 
older  brother  of  the  father  of  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks,  who  in  a  later  year  (1860)  be- 
came the  chosen  leader  of  the  Indiana 
Democracy  and  remained  such  beyond 
cavil  to  the  end  of  his  life,  the  latter  part 
of  1885.  So  satisfactorily  did  William 
Hendricks  represent  his  constituency  that 
he  was  twice  re-elected  to  Congress,  serv- 
ing three  terms  in  all.  As  a  further  evi- 
dence of  appreciation  Mr.  Hendricks  was 
elected  Governor  in  1822,  but  before  com- 
pleting his  term  he  was  again  sent  to  Con- 
gress, this  time  as  Senator.  A  second  term 
as  United  States  Senator  was  accorded 
him,  thus  extending  his  congressional 
service  to  eighteen  years  in  all.  Historic- 
ally we  are  informed  that  "during  his  term 
as  Governor  the  people  were  struggling 
under  the  load  of  business  depression  fol- 
lowing 1820,  and  that  but  little  of  moment 
was  done  by  the  Legislature  except  advanc- 
ing the  cause  of  education." 


November  15,  1816,  a  resolution  was  in- 
troduced in  the  House  that  a  committee  be 
appointed  for  the  purpose  of  taking  into 
consideration  the  expediency  of  providing 
for  the  election  of  President  and  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States.  The  com- 
mittee was  composed  of  Amos  Lane,  Dear- 
born county;  John  Dumont,  Switzerland; 
Ratliff  Boon,  Warrick;  Thomas  Carr, 
Clark,  and  Edward  Hogan,  Gibson,  to  meet 
with  a  joint  committee  of  the  Senate. 

In  joint  session  the  Senate  and  House 
elected  as  presidential  electors:  Jesse  L. 
Holman,  General  Joseph  Bartholomew, 
and  Thomas  H.  Blake.  They  voted  for 

The  vote  for  United  States  Senator  was : 
James  Noble,  26 ;  Waller  Taylor,  20 ;  James 
Scott.  16;  Jesse  L.  Holman,  3;  Ezra  Fer- 
ris, 2 ;  Davis  Floyd,  2 ;  Walter  Wilson,  2 ; 
Elias  McNamee,  1. 

In  1820  the  Legislature  in  joint  session 
elected  as  presidential  electors:  Daniel  I. 
Caswell,  John  H.  Thompson,  and  Nathan- 
iel Ewing.  The  Vincemies  Sun  stated 
after  these  gentlemen  had  discharged  their 
official  duty :  "It  is  said  the  electors  voted 
for  James  Monroe  for  President  and  Dan- 
iel D.  Tompkins  for  Vice-President." 


The  history  of  party  organization  in  In- 
diana may  be  said  to  date  from  the  first 
Jackson  campaign  of  1824,  incited  by  the 
United  States  Bank  issue,  which  had  been 
raised  by  "Old  Hickory."  This  extended 
back  even  to  the  Madison  administration, 
for  the  Western  Sun,  published  at  Vin- 
cennes,  reporting  the  legislative  elections 
of  August,  1820,  says:  "Election  reports 
show  that  majorities  had  been  given  over 
the  'Banking,  or  Federal  ticket.'  " 

The  same  publication  furnished  an  in- 
sight into  methods  of  candidate  making, 
for  a  later  issue  makes  this  announcement : 
"A  register  has  been  opened  at  the  grocery 
store  of  Mr.  William  Micure,  where  the 
friends  of  the  different  candidates  may 
record  their  names  under  their  respective 

In  the  1824  campaign  originally  David 
Robb,  of  Gibson  county;  Hiram  Aldridge, 
of  Shelby ;  Jonathan  McCarty,  of  Fayette ; 
John  Milroy,  of  Lawrence,  and  John  Carr, 
of  Clark,  were  chosen  as  Jackson  electors, 
but  some  dissatisfaction  arose  because  cer- 
tain ones  would  not  withdraw,  while  oth- 
ers were  held  to  be  ineligible.  In  conse- 
quence of  the  state  of  feeling  thus  aroused, 
a  call  was  issued  for  a  convention  to  be 
held  September  16  at  the  Court  House  in 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

Salem  "for  the  purpose  of  forming  an  elec- 
toral ticket  in  favor  of  Andrew  Jackson 
for  President  of  the  United  States." 

Thirteen  counties  were  represented  at 
the  convention  by  delegates  who  selected 
Samuel  Milroy,  of  Washington  county,  as 
chairman,  and  Jacob  Call,  of  Knox  county, 
as  secretary.  A  new  electoral  ticket  was 
named,  composed  of  David  Robb,  of  Gib- 
son county;  Samuel  Milroy,  of  Washing- 
ton; Elias  McNamee,  of  Knox  county; 
Jonathan  McCarty,  of  Fayette,  and  John 
Carr,  of  Clark. 

Dr.  J.  T.  Canby,  of  Madison;  Samuel 
Beach,  of  Jeffersonville,  and  Jesse  B.  Der- 
ham,  of  Jackson  county,  were  appointed  "a 
general  corresponding  committee  with  full 
power,  and  whose  duty  was  to  fill  any  va- 
cancies that  might  occur  on  the  electoral 
ticket,  and  to  take  such  measures  as  may 
be  necessary  to  insure  success." 

The  Henry  Clay  electoral  ticket  was 
composed  of  William  W.  Wick,  of  Marion 
county;  Marson  G.  Clark,  of  Washington 
county ;  James  Rariden,  of  Wayne  county ; 
Walter  Wilson,  of  Gibson  county,  and 
Moses  Tabbs,  of  Knox  county. 

The  electors  for  John  Quincy  Adams 
were:  Isaac  Blackford,  of  Knox  county; 
Jesse  L.  Holman,  of  Dearborn  county ;  Da- 
vid H.  Maxwell,  of  Monroe  county ;  James 
Scott,  of  Clark  county,  and  Christopher 
Harrison,  of  Washington  county.  (Jesse 
L.  Holman  was  the  father  of  William  S. 
Holman,  who  served  a  longer  period  in 
Congress  than  any  other  Indianian,  and 
who  achieved  a  national  reputation  as  the 
relentless  objector  to  every  extravagance 
in  the  expenditure  of  public  moneys.  Mil- 
lions upon  millions  of  dollars  were  thus, 
through  his  vigilance  and  steadfastness, 
saved  the  nation  during  his  long  and  use- 
ful congressional  service.) 


The  second  and  final  convention  called 
to  appoint  Jackson  electors,  Dr.  J.  T.  Can- 
by,  of  Madison,  Samuel  Beach  of  Jeffer- 

sonville, and  Jesse  B.  Derham  of  Jackson 
county,  were  appointed  a  general  corre- 
spondence committee  having  full  power, 
and  whose  duty  was  to  fill  any  vacancies 
on  the  electoral  ticket  "and  take  such  meas- 
ures as  may  be  necessary  to  insure  its  suc- 

Samuel  Judah,  Dr.  Israel  T.  Canby, 
Henry  S.  Handy,  of  Jefferson;  Samuel 
Carr,  of  Clark,  and  William  Kelsey,  of 
Lawrence,  were  named  to  prepare  an  ad- 
dress to  the  people  of  Indiana  on  the  ap- 
proaching election,  same  being  published 
October  16,  1824,  by  the  Western  Sun  and 
General  Advertiser,  of  Vincennes,  in  part 
as  follows : 

"The  history  of  Andrew  Jackson  pre- 
sents every  pledge  deeds  can  give  of  his 
ability  for  all  his  country  can  require  of 

"His  political  principles  undoubted,  his 
integrity  without  a  stain,  and  above  sus- 
picion ;  his  greatness  of  intellect  proved  by 
the  ever-successful  result  of  all  his  enter- 
prises, we  confide  in  him  and  we  deem  him 
most  worthy  the  Presidency  of  the  na- 
tion.    . 

"The  history  of  philosophy,  the  legisla- 
tion of  Solon  and  genius  of  her  sons  have 
immortalized  Athens.  The  time  was  when 
the  spirit  of  Minerva  inspired  her  coun- 
cils. Neptune  bowed  his  trident  before 
her,  and  the  commerce  of  the  world  poured 
the  wealth  of  nations  at  her  feet.  But 
corruption  sealed  the  destiny  of  the  Athen- 
ians— Pericles  had  expended  the  spoils  of 
the  public  treasury  in  bribing  his  fellov/ 
citizens — virtue  had  ceased  to  exist  at 
Athens,  etc. 

"As  Americans,  as  citizens  of  the  West, 
as  Republicans,  and  as  men  only  actuated 
by  a  sincere  love  of  our  common  country, 
of  its  love,  prosperity  and  happiness,  we 
most  earnestly  recommend  to  you,  fellow 
citizens,  to  support  the  man  of  the  people, 
Andrew  Jackson." 

At  the  presidential  election  in  1824  the 
people  of  Indiana,  for  the  first  time  since 
her  admission  into  the  Union,  were  per- 
mitted to  name  the  electors  by  popular 
vote.  Prior  thereto  the  electors  were 
chosen  by  the  Legislature.  The  electors 
named  in  1816  were  chosen  before  Indiana 


8  16-1 

had  been  admitted  into  the  Union.  There 
was  some  objection  to  this  procedure,  but 
in  the  absence  of  serious  opposition,  In- 
diana's three  votes  were  included  in  the 
count  for  Monroe. 


At  this  gathering,  held  on  the  8th  of 
January,  Israel  T.  Canby  presided.  Ben- 
jamin V.  Becker  was  named  as  vice-presi- 
dent, and  Paris  C.  Dunning  and  William 
Marshall  officiated  as  secretaries. 

Jackson  electors  chosen  were:  Benja- 
min V.  Becker,  Knox;  Jesse  B.  Derham, 
Jackson;  Ross  Smiley,  Union;  Ratliff 
Boon,  Warrick;  William  Lowe,  Monroe. 

A  committee  was  appointed  to  prepare 
an  address  to  the  people  of  Indiana  in 
favor  of  Andrew  Jackson.  This  commit- 
tee was  made  to  consist  of  Samuel  Judah, 
Knox;  Paris  C.  Dunning,  Monroe;  John 
Cain,  Marion;  Marcus  Willitt,  Rush; 
Thomas  Fitzgerald,  Warrick. 

A  general  superintendence  committee 
was  named  as  follows:  R.  C.  Newland, 
Eli  W.  Malott,  John  McMahan,  Henry  S. 
Handy,  of  Washington  county;  General 
John  Carr,  of  Clark;  William  Hoggatt, 
Orange;  William  Marshall,  Jackson;  A.  S. 
Burnett,  Floyd;  John  Milroy,  Lawrence; 
Nelson  Lodge,  Jefferson;  Elihu  Stout, 
Knox;  William  C.  Keen,  Switzerland; 
Thomas  Posey,  Harrison;  Jacob  B.  Lowe, 
Monroe;  David  V.  Culley,  Dearborn. 


The  supporters  of  the  Adams  adminis- 
tration held  their  convention  January  12, 
1828,  and  named  for  presidential  electors 
General  Joseph  Orr,  of  Putnam  county; 
John  Watts,  of  Dearborn;  General  Joseph 
Bartholomew,  Gibson;  Rev.  James  Arm- 
strong, Monroe.  Mr.  Armstrong  subse- 
quently declined,  and  General  Amaziah 
Morgan  was  substituted.  John  Watts  pre- 
sided over  the  convention  that  named  these 
electors.     A  protective  tariff  and  internal 

improvements  were  presented  as  the  main 
issues  of  the  campaign.  Opposition  to 
Jackson  was  pronounced. 


For  the  1832  campaign  the  Jacksonites 
met  in  State  convention  at  the  State  House 
December  12,  1831.  Benjamin  V.  Becker, 
of  Knox  county,  presided.  Arthur  Patter- 
son, of  Parke,  and  David  Robb  served  as 
vice-presidents,  and  Wm.  J.  Brown  of 
Rush  and  Nathaniel  Field  of  Clark  offi- 
ciated as  secretaries.  Thirty-nine  coun- 
ties were  represented. 

A  committee  consisting  of  Messrs.  Mor- 
rison, Feeney,  Culley,  Reid  and  Davis  re- 
ported a  series  of  resolutions  which  were 
published  in  the  Co.s.s  County  Times  of  De- 
cember 30,  1831.  They  dwell  on  the  de- 
pressed condition  of  the  country  when 
President  Jackson  entered  upon  office  and 
point  with  satisfaction  to  the  improvement 
wrought  by  his  administration;  foreign 
treaties  made  by  the  Jackson  administra- 
tion come  in  for  laudation. 

Electors  named  were:  George  Boon, 
Sullivan  county;  James  Blake,  Marion; 
Arthur  Patterson,  Parke;  Nathan  B.  Pal- 
mer, Jefferson,  and  Marks  Crume,  Fayette. 

Contingent  electors:  Thomas  Givens, 
Posey  county ;  Alexander  S.  Burnet;  Floyd ; 
Walter  Armstrong,  Dearborn,  and  John 
Ketcham,  Monroe. 

Resolutions  adopted  were  to  this  effect: 
"That  we  approve  the  measures  of  the 
present  administration,  and  especially  the 
late  change  in  the  cabinet,  the  payment  of 
the  national  debt,  the  removal  of  the  In- 
dians, and  the  right  system  of  economy 
and  accountability  effected  and  recom- 
mended by  our  present  'revered'  President, 
Andrew  Jackson." 

Hon.  John  Tipton,  Hon.  Ratliff  Boon, 
Hon.  Jonathan  McCarty,  Hon.  John  Carr 
and  Gen.  Samuel  Milroy  were  named  dele- 
gates to  the  Baltimore  convention. 

2 — History 




Central  Committee:  A.  F.  Morrison,  D. 
L.  McFarland,  Abraham  W.  Harrison, 
George  L.  Kinnard  and  Henry  Brady,  Ma- 
rion county;  Nathaniel  Bolton,  Jefferson; 
Jacob  Shank,  Shelby;  John  C.  Julien,  Hen- 
dricks ;  John  P.  Dunn  and  William  Lanius, 
Dearborn;  Enos  Lowe,  Putnam;  Aaron 
Finch,  Jefferson;  Edward  A.  Hannegan, 
Fountain;  John  Spencer,  John  Irwin  and 
Daniel  Reid,  Wayne ;  John  C.  Huckleberry, 
Clark;  John  W.  Cox,  Morgan;  William  P. 
Riser,  Bartholomew;  John  Wood,  Rush; 
John  Berry,  Madison;  Jeremiah  Smith, 
Randolph ;  R.  C.  Newland,  Washington ; 
John  Gardner,  Vermillion. 

Governor  Ray  seems  to  have  experienced 
some  difficulty  in  balancing  himself  polit- 
ically. Ostensibly  a  Jacksonian,  he  con- 
sidered it  an  affront  to  be  asked  to  commit 
himself  one  way  or  another. 


The  opponents  of  Jackson  styled  them- 
selves National  Republicans.  They  held 
their  State  convention  at  Indianapolis,  No- 
vember 7,  1831.  Nineteen  counties  were 
represented  by  thirty-one  delegates. 
Twelve  others  were  given  seats.  Charles 
Dewey,  of  Clark  county,  presided ;  Douf an 
Maguire,  of  Marion  county,  acted  as  sec- 
retary. The  resolutions  adopted  start  out 
with  these  declarations : 

"The  friends  of  the  American  system 
composing  this  convention  warmly  partici- 
pate with  their  fellow  citizens  of  Indiana 
and  the  adjacent  States  in  the  general  de- 
sire to  see  the  vital  interests  of  domestic 
industry  and  internal  improvements  res- 
cued from  their  present  state  of  jeopardy, 
and  fostered  and  maintained  with  un- 
abated zeal.  They  are  especially  desirous 
to  witness  a  correct,  honorable  and  suc- 
cessful administration  of  the  general  gov- 
ernment. The  captivating  promises  of  re- 
trenchment and  reform  in  which  the 
friends  of  General  Jackson  so  copiously 
indulged  previous  to  the  last  election  have 
not  been  realized.  The  alleged  abuses  of 
the  former  administration  have  been  cop- 
ied and  re-copied  so  often  by  the  present, 
that,  if  their  number  and  magnitude  had 

not  destroyed  the  resemblance,  we  should 
be  led  to  imagine  that  the  defects  of  the 
administration  of  Mr.  Adams  had  been 
selected  as  the  models  for  that  of  General 

The  resolutions  declared  for  a  tariff  of 
duties  for  the  protection  of  American  in- 
dustry, for  internal  improvement,  and  en- 
dorsed Henry  Clay  for  President. 

Delegates  to  the  Baltimore  convention 
selected  were:  John  I.  Neely,  Isaac  Howk, 
and  George  H.  Dunn. 

The  Indiana  Democrat  said  this  conven- 
tion "numbered  several  who  had  lately 
been  invited  into  retirement  by  the  peo- 
ple," mentioning  Messrs.  Test,  Oliver  H. 
Smith,  John  H.  Thompson,  Isaac  Howk, 
Law  and  W.  W.  Wick.  The  paper  called 
it  "A  Forlorn  Hope." 

A  preliminary  meeting  was  held  at 
Brookville,  Franklin  county,  March  14, 
1834,  to  pave  the  way  for  nominating  a 
successor  to  President  Jackson.  Dr.  John 
Bradburn  presided  and  Ben  Sed  Noble 
acted  as  secretary.  Col.  C.  W.  Hutchens, 
Jonathan  Eads  and  Dr.  George  Berry  were 
the  committee  on  resolutions  which  re- 
ported an  endorsement  of  Martin  Van 
Buren  for  President  and  Richard  M.  John- 
son of  Kentucky  for  Vice-President.  No 
further  action  was  taken  at  this  gathering, 
but  a  convention  was  called  to  be  held  at 
Indianapolis,  December  9,  1834,  at  which 
General  Samuel  Milroy  presided.  Robert 
Mclntyre  of  Fountain  county  and  David  V. 
Culley  of  Dearborn  county  were  named  as 
vice-presidents,  and  William  B.  White  of 
Fountain  county  and  A.  F.  Morrison  of 
Marion  officiated  as  secretaries. 

Three  delegates  to  the  national  conven- 
tion which  was  subsequently  called  to  be 
held  at  Baltimore,  May  20,  1835,  were 
named  from  each  of  the  seven  districts,  as 
follows : 

First — John  B.  Moyer,  Orange  county; 
Joseph  Lane,  Vanderburg;  John  Pitcher, 



19  16 

Second — Lewis  H.  Sands,  Putnam; 
Ralph  Wilson,  Vigo ;  Hiram  Decker,  Knox. 

Third — Dr.  Jesse  Jackson,  Scott;  Gen- 
eral William  Marshall,  and  Isaac  Stewart. 

Fourth — Andrew  Davidson,  Decatur; 
John  P.  Dunn,  Dearborn;  William  J. 
Brown,  Rush. 

Fifth— Daniel  Reid,  Wayne;  John  Spen- 
cer, Allen ;  John  D.  Vaughan,  Wayne. 

Sixth — Alexander  F.  Morrison,  John 
Cain  and  Livingston  Dunlap,  Marion. 

Seventh — Genei-al  Samuel  Milroy,  Car- 
roll; T.  A.  Howard,  Parke;  Thomas  B. 
BrowTi,  Tippecanoe.       -i  ( '  (-'-i''"  A*2, 

An  enthusiastic  ratification  convention 
was  held  at  Indianapolis,  January  8,  1836. 
The  convention  was  called  to  order  by 
George  Boon,  of  Sullivan  county.  General 
Samuel  Milroy,  of  Carroll  county,  was 
made  temporary  chairman,  and  Thomas  B. 
Brown  of  Tippecanoe  and  Jesse  Jackson 
of  Scott,  secretaries.  The  permanent  or- 
ganization was  oflScered  by  the  following 
named  gentlemen : 

President:  Nathan  B.  Palmer,  Marion 

Vice-Presidents :  William  Casey,  Posey ; 
George  Boon,  Sullivan;  John  Prather, 
Clark;  Thomas  Howard,  Dearborn;  Ross 
Smiley,  Fayette;  Elihu  Stout,  Knox;  Wil- 
liam White,  Vermillion. 

Secretaries:  Thomas  B.  Brown,  Tippe- 
canoe; Jesse  Jackson,  Scott;  William  C. 
Foster,  Monroe ;  James  W.  Borden,  Wayne. 
Upon  taking  the  chair  Mr.  Palmer  said: 
"We  have  convened  on  the  present  occa- 
sion as  the  representatives  of  the  people, 
clothed  with  the  important  trust  of  select- 
ing an  electoral  ticket  from  our  Demo- 
cratic brethren,  pledged  to  vote  for  the 
Hon.  Martin  Van  Buren,  of  New  York,  for 
President  of  the  United  States,  and  for 
Col.  Richard  M.  Johnson,  of  Kentucky,  for 

"These  distinguished  gentlemen  stand 
pledged  as  the  disciples  of  Jefferson  and 
Jackson,  to  carry  out  and  to  preserve  in 
their  purity  those  great  republican  prin- 
ciples, which,  from  the  earliest  period  of 

our  government,  it  has  been  the  great  ob- 
ject of  the  Democratic  party  to  sustain." 

In  closing,  Mr.  Palmer  said : 

"Nor  should  we  be  regardless  of  the  im- 
portance of  union  and  harmony  in  our 
ranks.  ...  A  spirit  that  asks  not 
the  aid  nor  interference  of  Congress  to 
make  for  the  people  a  president.  Yea, 
more,  a  spirit  of  indignation  of  the  de- 
moralizing tendency  of  that  open  and 
avowed  object  of  so  multiplying  candidates 
for  the  Presidency,  that  the  people  may 
be  induced,  through  local  interests  and 
local  influences,  to  so  cast  their  votes 
as  to  cheat  themselves  out  of  the  choice  of 
the  chief  magistrate  of  this  Union.  But  I 
pursue  this  subject  no  farther.  The  out- 
rage contemplated  in  this  attempt  is  too 
palpable  to  escape  the  notice  of  any  intelli- 
gent citizens." 

There  were  reasons  for  sounding  this 
note  of  warning.  Insidious  eff'orts  were 
made  in  various  parts  of  the  Union  to 
bring  out  candidates  for  the  presidency, 
with  a  view  to  complicating  affairs  and 
causing  strife  and  contention  among  those 
who  had  steadfastly  upheld  the  adminis- 
tration of  President  Jackson.  Judge  Mc- 
Lean was  formally  brought  out  for  the 
presidency  by  a  caucus  of  the  Ohio  Legis- 
lature. Thomas  H.  Benton  was  put  in 
nomination  at  a  meeting  in  Alabama.  John 
Forsyth,  the  distinguished  editor  of  the 
Mobile  Regi-'iter,  was  put  in  nomination  by 
the  Georgia  Legislature. 

The  WesteDi  Sun  published  a  letter  Jan- 
uary 24,  1835,  from  Thomas  H.  Benton,  in 
which  he  declined  to  stand  as  a  candidate 
for  the  vice-presidency  on  the  nomination 
given  him  by  the  Mississippi  State  conven- 
tion. He  lauds  Van  Buren  and  declares 
harmony  is  necessary  in  order  to  preserve 
the  party,  and  states  his  belief  that 
schemes  are  afoot  to  disorganize  the  party 
by  bringing  out  numerous  candidates.  The 
letter  was  i.ssued  in  answer  to  one  sent  him 
by  a  committee  composed  of  Robert  T. 
Lytle,  Ohio ;  Henry  Hubbard,  New  Hamp- 
shire; Ratliff  Boon,  Indiana,  and  H.  A. 
Muhlenberg,   Pennsylvania,   these   gentle- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

men  urging  reconsideration  of  his  an- 
nounced declaration. 

The  committee  on  resolutions  consisted 
of  James  Whitcomb,  Monroe ;  A.  C.  Grif- 
fith, Jackson;  V.  P.  Antwerp,  Vigo;  J.  R. 
Craig,  Posey;  George  Finch,  Vander- 
burg;  A.  C.  Reid,  Marion;  A.  C.  Pepper, 
Dearborn,  and  James  Ritchey,  Johnson. 

Electors-at-large :  John  Myers,  of  Knox, 
and  William  Rockhill,  of  Allen  county. 

Contingent  electors-at-large :  Robert 
Mclntyre,  of  Fountain  county,  and  Jona- 
than Lyon,  of  Washington  county. 


1.  Thomas  C.  Stewart,  Pike  county. 

2.  George  W.  Moore,  Owen. 

3.  Jesse  Jackson,  Scott. 

4.  Marinus  Willet,  Rush. 

5.  Gen.  Elisha  Long,  Wayne. 

6.  Jonathan  Williams,  Morgan. 

7.  Capt.  William  White,  Vermilion. 


1.  Col.  John  Pinnick,  Orange  county. 

2.  John  Thornburgh,  Putnam. 

3.  Jonathan  Lyon,  Washington. 

4.  William  Purcell,  Dearborn. 

5.  James  Leviston,  Union. 

6.  Gen.  John  Milroy,  Hancock. 

7.  James  Strange,  Parke. 

State  Central  Committee  named  at  this 
convention:  Livingston  Dunlap,  Nathan 
B.  Palmer,  James  Morrison,  Arthur  St. 
Clair,  John  Cain,  A.  F.  Morrison,  S.  W. 
Norris,  James  B.  Ray,  Nathaniel  West, 
Sr.,  Nathaniel  Bolton,  John  Jamison,  John 
Livingston,  Archibald  C.  Reid,  Demas  L. 
McFarland  and  Henry  Brady,  all  from 
near  Marion  county. 


A  meeting  favorable  to  the  elevation  of 
General  William  Henry  Harrison  v^^as  held 
at  the  Franklin  county  court  house  in 
Brookville,  February  5,  1835.  Enoch  Mc- 
Carty  presided.  Resolutions  were  adopted 
lauding  the  candidacy  of  General  Harri- 
son for  the  presidency.  A  committee  was 
appointed  to  prepare  an  address  to  the 

citizens  of  the  United  States,  as  follows: 
David  Mount,  Dr.  Samuel  St.  John,  Major 
J.  L.  Andrew,  John  A.  Matson,  Robert 
John,  Lemuel  Snow,  Bartholomew  Fitz- 
patrick,  James  Samuels  and  Capt.  John 

A  public  meeting  was  held  in  Franklin 
county,  February  6,  1835.  Fielding  Jeter 
was  chairman  and  Col.  B.  S.  Noble  secre- 
tary. Jeter  left  before  the  convention 
was  over  and  Noble  took  the  chair. 

John  A.  Matson  presented  the  following 
resolution : 

"Resolved,  That  the  evils  of  excited 
party  spirit  have  become  so  great  in  the 
United  States  that  the  people  are  imperi- 
ously called  upon  to  take  some  measures 
to  allay  the  excitement.     .      .      ." 

It  ended  by  declaring  confidence  in  Gen- 
eral William  Henry  Harrison  of  Ohio. 

C.  W.  Hutchens  offered  a  motion  to  ad- 
journ for  four  weeks,  which  was  lost.  He 
then  offered  as  a  substitute: 

"Whereas,  Several  hundred  of  the  citi- 
zens of  Franklin  county  united  in  inviting 
together  their  fellow  citizens  for  a  specific 
object,  viz.,  to  adopt  measures,  that  in  the 
opinion  of  this  assemblage  shall  be  best 
adapted  to  the  work  of  allaying  party 
strife  or  excitement — a  consummation  de- 
voutly to  be  wished ;  we  have  after  mature 
reflection  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
object  can  be  best  attained  by  leaving  the 
business  of  candidate-making  to  others 
who  are  better  acquainted  with  the  claims 
of  prominent  men  than  is  possible  in  the 
nature  of  things  than  we  can  be.  There- 

"Resolved,  That  we  will,  each  of  us,  re- 
turn to  our  respective  places  of  abode,  and 
with  the  utmost  composure,  await  the 
presentation  of  the  candidates  for  the  of- 
fice of  President  and  Vice-I'resident  of  the 
United  States,  and  also  impartially  exam- 
ine, from  the  best  opportunities  offered, 
the  qualifications,  and  make  our  selections 

"Resolved,  That  we  deprecate  all  at- 
tempts to  dictate  to  us,  from  whatever 
source,  and  that  we  prefer  open  dealing  to 
blind  innuendo. 

"Resolved,  That  we  think  this  course  en- 
tirely characteristic  of  freemen,  and  con- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

tradistinguished  by  that  of  calling  together 
a  select  few  for  the  advancement  of  party 
views  to  operate  more  abroad  than  at 

These  resolutions  were  adopted.  C.  W. 
Hutchen  then  moved  to  amend  the  resolu- 
tion of  John  A.  Matson  by  striking  out  the 
name  of  Harrison  and  inserting  the  name 
of  the  person  who  may  be  nominated  by 
the  Democratic  National  Convention  to  be 
held  on  the  20th  of  May,  1835.  This  mo- 
tion failed,  as  did  also  that  by  Hutchens, 
to  substitute  the  name  of  Martin  Van 
Buren  for  that  of  Hai-rison. 

Though  the  Democrats  of  Indiana  did 
not  succeed  in  securing  the  election  of  Van 
Buren  electors,  they  felt  highly  elated  over 
the  victory  won  in  the  country-at-large. 
While  averse  to  General  Harrison  being 
made  Pi'esident  of  the  United  States,  they 
felt  that  the  pioneers  owed  him  a  large 
debt  of  gratitude  for  the  splendid  military 
sei'vice  he  rendered  in  fighting  the  Indians 
and  making  it  possible  for  white  men  to 
gain  a  habitation  and  enjoy  the  benefits 


A  jollification  over  the  election  of  Van 
Buren  and  Johnson  was  held  December  26, 
1836,  at  Ross  Smiley's  store  at  Longwood, 
Fayette  county.  The  newspaper  account 

"When  the  meeting  was  proposed  it  was 
only  intended  to  meet  and  drink  a  few  bot- 
tles of  wine  in  sociability,  expressive  of 
the  good  feeling  experienced  on  the  occa- 
sion. But  finding  the  meeting  would  be 
numerously  attended,  a  beautiful  young 
hickoiy,  five  inches  in  diameter,  was  plant- 
ed with  the  bark  and  limbs  thereon,  and 
bearing  a  flagstaff",  with  a  new  hickory 
broom  on  the  top  and  a  flag  of  the  Union 
suspended  at  a  distance  of  seventy-five  feet 
from  the  ground.  On  the  flag  was  im- 
pressed the  name  of  Martin  Van  Buren  in 
large  letters,  with  the  eagle,  stars  and 
stripes,  and  decorated  with  ribbons — all  in 
handsome  style." 

CONGRESS  FROM  1816  TO  1833. 

During  the  first  six  years  of  Statehood 
Indiana  had  but  one  Representative  in 
Congress — William  Hendricks.  Under  a 
new  apportionment,  as  the  result  of  large- 
ly increased  population,  the  State  became 
entitled  to  three  Representatives.  This 
ratio  continued  until  1833,  when  the 
State's  representation  was  more  than  dou- 
bled. William  Prince,  ex-Governor  Jona- 
than Jennings  and  John  Test  were  elected 
to  the  Eighteenth  Congress.  Mr.  Prince 
was  killed  by  the  explosion  of  a  steamboat 
on  the  way  to  Washington  to  begin  his 
term  of  ofl^ce.  Jacob  Call  was  elected  to 
fill  the  vacancy. 

To  tho  Nineteenth  Congress — 182.5  to 
1827 — Ratlifl:  Boon,  Jonathan  Jennings 
and  John  Test  were  elected. 

There  was  quite  a  "shake-up"  in  the 
election  of  members  to  the  Twentieth  Con- 
gress, Boon  having  been  defeated  and 
Thomas  Blake  chosen  in  his  stead.  Jen- 
nings fared  better,  succeeding  himself,  but 
Test  was  replaced  by  Oliver  H.  Smith. 

At  the  following  election  the  delegation 
to  the  Twenty-first  Congress  was  again 
made  to  consist  of  Boon,  Jennings,  and 
Test.  But  at  the  election  two  years  later 
Ratliff'  Boon  was  the  only  one  of  the  trio 
to  retain  his  seat,  so  that  Indiana's  delega- 
tion to  the  Twenty-second  Congress  was 
made  to  consist  of  Ratliff  Boon,  John  Carr, 
and  Jonathan  McCarty.  With  the  ending 
of  that  decade  terminated  Indiana's  trio 

In  order  to  give  the  present  generation 
something  of  an  idea  of  the  manner  of  men 
sent  to  Congress  from  Indiana  in  the  ear- 
lier days  of  the  State's  existence,  brief 
biographical  sketches  are  presented : 

WILLIAM  HENDRICKS,  a  Represen- 
tative and  a  Senator;  born  in  Westmore- 
land county,  Pennsylvania,  November  12, 
1782  ;  attended  the  common  schools ;  moved 
to  Madison,  Ind.,  in  1814;  Secretary  of  the 



first  State  Constitutional  Convention; 
elected  as  a  Democrat  to  the  Fourteenth, 
Fifteenth,  Sixteenth  and  Seventeenth  Con- 
gresses and  served  from  March  4,  1815, 
until  his  resignation  in  1822 ;  Governor  of 
Indiana  1822-1825;  elected  United  States 
Senator  from  Indiana;  re-elected  in  1831, 
and  served  from  March  4,  1825,  to  March 
3,  1837;  died  in  Madison,  Ind.,  May  16, 

RATLIFF  BOON,  born  in  Franklin 
county,  North  Carolina,  January  18,  1781 ; 
moved  with  his  father  to  Warren  county, 
Kentucky ;  emigrated  to  Danville,  Ky.,  and 
learned  the  gunsmith's  trade ;  attended  the 
public  schools ;  moved  to  Indiana  in  1809 ; 
on  the  organization  of  Warren  county  was 
appointed  its  first  treasurer;  member  of 
the  State  House  of  Representatives  in 
1816-1817;  elected  to  the  State  Senate  in 
1818;  elected  Lieutenant-Governor  of  In- 
diana in  1819;  upon  the  resignation  of 
Jonathan  Jennings  as  Governor,  filled  out 
the  unexpired  term  until  December  5, 
1822;  re-elected  Lieutenant-Governor  and 
resigned  to  become  candidate  for  Con- 
gress; elected  to  the  Nineteenth  Congress 
(March  4,  1825  to  March  3,  1827)  as  a 
Jackson  Democrat;  elected  to  the  Twenty- 
first,  Twenty-second,  Twenty-third,  Twen- 
ty-fourth and  Twenty-fifth  Congresses 
(March  4,  1829,  to  March  3,  1839)  ;  unsuc- 
cessful candidate  for  the  United  States 
Senate  in  1836 ;  moved  to  Pike  county,  Mis- 
souri; died  in  Louisiana,  Mo.,  November 
20,  1844. 

JONATHAN  JENNINGS,  a  delegate 
from  Indiana  Territory,  and  a  Representa- 
tive from  Indiana;  born  in  Hunterdon 
county,  New  Jersey,  in  1784;  went  with 
parents  to  Fayette  county,  Pennsylvania, 
where  he  pursued  an  academic  course; 
went  to  Indiana  Territory  and  became 
Clerk  of  the  Territorial  Legislature ;  elect- 
ed the  first  delegate  from  Indiana  Terri- 
tory to  the  Eleventh  Congress;  re-elected 
to  the  Twelfth,  Thirteenth  and  Fourteenth 

Congresses,  and  served  from  November 
27,  1809,  to  March  3,  1817;  elected  Gov- 
ernor of  Indiana  in  December,  1816,  and 
served  until  1822;  appointed  Indian  Com- 
missioner in  1818;  elected  to  the  Seven- 
teenth Congress  to  fill  the  vacancy  caused 
by  the  resignation  of  William  Hendricks; 
re-elected  to  the  Eighteenth,  Nineteenth, 
Twentieth  and  Twenty-first  Congresses, 
and  served  from  December  2,  1822,  to 
March  3,  1831 ;  died  near  Charlestown, 
Ind.,  July  26,  1834. 

JOHN  TEST,  a  native  of  Salem,  N.  J. ; 
attended  the  common  schools ;  studied  law, 
was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  began  prac- 
tice in  Brookville,  Ind.;  held  several. local 
offices;  elected  as  a  Clay  Democrat  to  the 
Eighteenth  and  Nineteenth  Congresses 
(March  4,  1823,  to  March  3,  1827)  ;  un- 
successful candidate  for  re-election  to  the 
Twentieth  Congress ;  re-elected  as  a  Whig 
to  the  Twenty-first  Congress  (March  4, 
1829,  to  March  3,  1831)  ;  presiding  judge 
of  Indiana  circuit  court;  moved  to  Mobile, 
Ala. ;  died  near  Cambridge  City,  Ind.,  Oc- 
tober 9,  1849. 

born  in  Calvert  county,  Maryland,  June 
14,  1792;  attended  the  public  schools  and 
studied  law  in  Washington,  D.  C. ;  member 
of  the  militia  of  the  District  of  Columbia 
which  took  part  in  the  battle  of  Bladens- 
berg,  in  1814;  moved  to  Kentucky  and 
then  to  Indiana ;  began  the  practice  of  law 
in  Terre  Haute;  prosecuting  attorney  and 
judge  of  the  circuit  court;  gave  up  the 
practice  of  law  and  engaged  in  business ; 
for  several  years  a  member  of  the  State 
Legislature  of  Indiana;  elected  as  an 
Adams  Republican  to  the  Twentieth  Con- 
gress (March  4,  1827,  to  March  3,  1829)  ; 
appointed  Commissioner  of  the  General 
Land  Office  by  President  Tyler,  May  19, 
1842,  and  served  until  April,  1845;  chosen 
President  of  the  Erie  &  Wabash  Canal 
Company;   visited    England   as   Financial 

HISTORY   INDIANA   DEMOCRACY  —  181  (3 -191 

Agent  of  the  State  of  Indiana;  on  his  re- 
turn died  in  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  November 
28,  1849. 

OLIVER  H.  SMITH,  a  Representative 
and  a  Senator  from  Indiana;  born  on 
Smith's  Island,  near  Trenton,  N.  J.,  Octo- 
ber 23,  1794 ;  moved  to  Indiana  in  1817 ; 
attended  the  public  schools;  studied  law, 
was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  began  prac- 
tice in  Connersville,  Ind. ;  member  of  the 
State  House  of  Representatives  in  1822- 
1824;  Prosecuting  Attorney  for  the  Third 
Judicial  District  1824  and  1825 ;  elected  as 
a  Jackson  Democrat  to  the  Twentieth  Con- 
gress (March  4,  1827,  to  March  3,  1829)  ; 
unsuccessful  candidate  for  re-election ; 
elected  as  a  Whig  to  the  United  States 
Senate  and  served  from  March  4,  1837,  to 
March  3,  1843  ;  declined  the  Whig  nomina- 
tion for  Governor  in  1845 ;  engaged  in  the 
railroad  business  in  Indianapolis;  died  in 
Indianapolis,  March  19,  1849. 

JOHN  CARR,  elected  as  a  Democrat  to 
the  Twenty-second,  Twenty-third  and 
Twenty-fourth  Congresses  (March  4, 
1831,  to  March  3,  1837)  ;  elected  to  the 
Twenty-sixth  Congress  (March  4,  1839,  to 
March  3,  1841)  ;  died  in  Charlestown,  Ind., 
January  20,  1845. 

James  Noble,  Waller  Taylor,  William 
Hendricks,  Robert  Hanna,  John  Tipton, 
Oliver  H.  Smith  and  Albert  S.  White  were 
chosen  prior  to  1840  to  represent  Indiana 
in  the  United  States  Senate.  Two  of 
them — William  Hendricks  and  Oliver  H. 
Smith — had  previously  served  in  the 
Lower  House  and  are  biographically  men- 
tioned in  the  foregoing  chapter.  They 
will,  therefore,  not  be  included  in  the 
sketches  following: 

JAMES  NOBLE,  born  near  Berryville, 
Clarke  county,  Virginia,  December  16, 
1785 ;  moved  with  his  parents  to  Campbell 
county,  Kentucky,  in  1795 ;  studied  law  and 

was  admitted  to  the  bar;  moved  to  Brook- 
ville,  Franklin  county,  Indiana,  in  1811; 
member  of  the  Territorial  Legislature; 
elected  to  the  United  States  Senate  in 
1816;  re-elected  in  1821  and  1827,  and 
served  from  November  8,  1816,  until  his 
death,  in  Washington,  D.  C,  Feb.  26,  1831. 

WALLER  TAYLOR,  born  in  Lunenburg 
county,  Virginia,  before  1786 ;  attended  the 
common  schools ;  studied  law,  was  admit- 
ted to  the  bar,  and  practiced;  member  of 
the  State  Legislature;  moved  to  Indiana 
in  1805,  and  located  in  Vincennes ;  Territo- 
rial Judge  in  1806;  served  as  aide-de-camp 
to  Gen.  William  H.  Harrison  in  the  war 
of  1812;  appointed  Territorial  Judge; 
elected  as  a  Democrat  to  the  United  States 
Senate;  re-elected  and  served  from  No- 
vember 8,  1816,  to  March  3,  1825;  died  in 
Lunenburg,  Va.,  August  26,  1826. 

ROBERT  HANNA,  born  in  Laurens 
district,  South  Carolina,  April  6,  1786;  set- 
tled in  Brookville,  Ind.,  in  1802 ;  sheriff  of 
the  common  pleas  court  1811-1820;  mem- 
ber of  the  Indiana  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion of  1816;  brigadier-general  of  State 
militia;  register  of  the  land  office;  moved 
to  Indianapolis  in  1825;  appointed  United 
States  Senator  as  a  Whig  to  fill  vacancy 
caused  by  the  death  of  James  Noble,  and 
served  from  December  5,  1831,  to  January 
3,  1832;  member  of  the  State  Senate; 
served  in  the  State  House  of  Representa- 
tives ;  killed  by  a  railroad  train  when  walk- 
ing upon  the  track  in  Indianapolis,  No- 
vember 16,  1858. 

JOHN  TIPTON,  born  in  Sevier  county, 
Tennessee,  August  14,  1786;  received  a 
limited  schooling;  moved  to  Harrison  coun- 
ty, Indiana,  in  1807 ;  served  with  the  "Yel- 
low Jackets"  in  the  Tippecanoe  campaign, 
and  attained  the  rank  of  brigadier-general 
of  militia ;  sheriff  of  Harrison  county,  In- 
diana, 1815-1819 ;  member  of  the  commit- 
tee to  locate  the  State  capitol  in  1821 ; 
served  in  the  State  of  Representa- 
tives 1819-1823;  one  of  the  commissioners 



to  select  a  site  for  a  new  capital  for  In- 
diana in  1820 ;  commissioner  to  determine 
boundary  line  between  Indiana  and  Illi- 
nois ;  appointed  U.  S.  Indian  agent  for  the 
Pottawatamie  and  Miami  tribes  in  March, 
1823 ;  laid  out  the  city  of  Logansport,  Ind., 
April  10,  1828;  elected  to  the  United 
States  Senate  to  fill  the  vacancy  caused  by 
the  death  of  James  Noble;  re-elected  in 
1833,  and  served  from  January  3,  1832, 
until  March  3,  1839;  died  in  Logansport, 
April  5,  1839. 

ALBERT  S.  WHITE,  born  in  Blooming 
Grove,  Orange  county.  New  York,  October 
24,  1803 ;  was  graduated  from  Union  Col- 
lege in  1822 ;  studied  law,  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  in  1825;  moved  to  Lafayette,  Ind., 
in  1829 ;  Clerk  of  the  State  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives for  five  years;  elected  as  a 
Whig  to  the  Twenty-fifth  Congress 
(March  4,  1837,  to  March  3,  1839)  ;  presi- 
dent of  several  railroads;  elected  to  the 
United  States  Senate,  and  served  from 
March  4,  1839,  to  March  3,  1845 ;  declined 
a  re-election;  elected  as  a  Republican  to 
the  Thirty-seventh  Congress  (March  4, 
1861,  to  March  3,  1863)  ;  Judge  of  the 
United  States  court  for  the  district  of  In- 
diana in  1864,  and  served  until  his  death 
in  Stockwell,  Ind.,  September  24,  1864. 

When  the  delegate  convention  met  at 
Corydon  on  the  10th  day  of  June,  1816, 
under  the  authority  of  the  enabling  act  of 
Congress,  to  frame  a  constitution  for  the 
new  State,  William  Hendricks  was  chosen 
secretary  of  that  small  but  able  and  his- 
toric body.  He  was  an  elder  brother  of 
Major  John  Hendricks,  father  of  Thomas 
A.  Hendricks.  Those  who  knew  him  in 
the  days  of  his  activity  described  him  as 
having  been  large  and  commanding  in  per- 
son and  as  bearing  in  his  physiognomy 
the  marks  of  strong  intellectuality.  In 
August  of  the  same  year  he  was  elected 
a  member  of  Congress  under  the  approved 

EMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

constitution,  thus  becoming  the  first  Rep- 
resentative of  the  State  of  Indiana  in  the 
National  Legislature.  Twice  re-elected  to 
this  position,  he  acquitted  himself  so  cred- 
itably that  he  was,  in  1822,  elected  Gov- 
ernor of  the  new  commonwealth  without 
opposition,  receiving  all  the  votes  cast  for 
that  high  office— 18,340. 

The  vote  for  Lieutenant-Governor  was : 

Ratliff  Boon   7,809 

William  Polke  4,044 

Erasmus  Powell 3,603 

David  H.  Maxwell 2,366 

It  is  a  notable  circumstance  that  Jona- 
than Jennings  preceded  Hendricks  in  Con- 
gress as  territorial  delegate  and  after 
serving  two  terms  as  Governor,  succeeded 
him  as  member  of  Congress.  This  ex- 
change of  places  is  in  itself  evidence  of  the 
high  esteem  in  which  these  two  men  were 
held  by  the  people  of  Indiana. 

Ratliflt'  Boon  had  been  chosen  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor in  1819.  When  Governor 
Jennings  was  elected  to  Congress  in  1822 
he  resigned  the  office  of  Governor.  Boon 
constitutionally  became  his  successor  and 
served  as  acting  Governor  from  September 
12  to  December  5,  1822.  At  the  August 
election  of  that  year  Boon  was  again 
chosen  Lieutenant-Governor  on  the  ticket 
headed  by  Mr.  Hendricks.  He  served  as 
such  until  the  close  of  the  legislative  ses- 
sion of  1824,  when  he  filed  his  resignation 
with  the  Secretary  of  State.  This  docu- 
ment was  dated  August  30,  1824.  Under 
the  same  date  he  addressed  a  letter  to  the 
State  Senate  in  which  he  announced  his 
act  of  resigning  the  office  which  he  had 
held  under  two  administrations — those  of 
Governors  Jennings  and  Hendricks. 

Before  the  close  of  his  term  as  Gov- 
ernor, Mr.  Hendricks  was  elected  United 
States  Senator  to  succeed  Waller  Taylor. 
He  filed  his  resignation  as  Governor  Feb- 
ruary 12,  1825.  There  being  then  no 
Lieutenant-Governor,  by  reason  of  the  res- 
ignation of  Ratliff  Boon,  January  30,  1824, 
James  B.  Ray,  as  President  of  the  Sen- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

ate,  became  acting  Governor,  serving  as  two  leaders  wei'e  in  hearty  accord  on  that 
such  until  December  11,  1825.  Mr.  Ray  and  other  questions  and  issues.  In  mat- 
was  twice  elected  Governor,  his  second  ters  pertaining  to  pacification  or  concilia- 
tenn  expiring  in  1831.  tion  the  name  "Hendricks"  seems  to  have 
At  his  first  election  Mr.  Ray  w^as  cred-  possessed  a  high  degree  of  magnetic 
ited  with  13,040  votes,  while  his  competi-  power. 

tor,  the  distinguished  jurist,  Isaac  Black-  And  yet,  toward  the  close  of  Mr.  Hen- 
ford,  then  an  anti-slaveiy  Whig  but  later  dricks's  second  term  as  U.  S.  Senator  cir- 
on  a  Democrat,  received  10,418  votes,  cumstances  so  shaped  themselves  as  to 
Scattering.  12.  For  Lieutenant-Governor  frustrate  his  aspiration  to  a  third  term  in 
the  vote  stood:  that  coveted  station.     It  may  be  assumed 

John  H.  Thompson 10,781  that,  having  served  three  successive  terms 

Samuel  Milroy 7,496  in  the  House,  he  cherished  the  hope  that 

Dennis  Penninp;ton  1,496  he  might  be   delegated   to   represent  his 

Elisha  Harrison 1,434  g^j^^g  f^^,  ^  jjj^g  number  in  the  Senate.     It 

General  W.  Johnson 851  .      t->            u         ioo/>    J.^     i.  xi              i.- 

„    .^    •                                         o^  was  in  December,  1836,  that  the  continu- 

Scatterins:   84 

,,  ^^  ,  ;  ,  ,  .  ,  ance  of  his  senatorial  service  came  to  a 
Mr.  Hendricks  served  two  terms  in  the  ^^^j  ^^^j^j^^^  The  candidates  pitted 
Senate  of  the  United  States  He  must  have  ^^^.^^^  ^.^  ^^,^^^  Governor  Noah  Noble, 
possessed,  in  an  eminent  degree,  the  con-  ^^^^^^  Lieutenant-Governor  Ratliff  Boon 
dilatory  quahties  and  pacifying  charac-  ^^^^  Congressman  Oliver  H.  Smith.  On 
teristics  of  his  nephew,  Thomas  A.  Hen-  ^^^  ^^.^^  ^^^1,^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^  Hendricks  were 
dricks,  whose  undisputed  leadership  of  his  j^  ^^^  j^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^^  ^^^^  ^^^  ^.^^^^.^^ 
party  for  a  full  quarter  of  a  century  is  changed.  On  the  ninth  ballot  Smith  car- 
without  parallel  in  the  history  of  the  State,  ^ied  away  the  honors-to  the  amazement 
Unlike  his  predecessor,  Governor  Jen-  ^^  ^^e  "old  timers"  who  at  the  beginning 
nings,  Mr.  Hendricks  did  not  seem  to  have  i^^ked  upon  his  candidacy  as  a  daring  and 
become  involved  in  the  bitter  controversies  .o^ewhat  presumptuous  political  venture, 
and  contests  provoked  prior  to  the  State's  William  Hendricks  was  bom  at  Ligo- 
admission  into  the  Union.  The  pro-slav-  ^^j^^,  Westmoreland  county,  Pennsylvania, 
ery  element  that  came  into  Indiana  Terri-  j^  j^g^  jje  was  educated  at  Canonsburg, 
tory  had  ingratiated  itself  in  the  good  ^^^^^^  f^^  a  classmate  Dr.  Wylie,  after- 
graces  of  General  and  Governor  William  ^^^d  a  distinguished  President  of  the 
Henry  Harrison,  who  himself  was  a  cham-  g^^^g  University  at  Bloomington.  Both  be- 
pion  of  that  cause.  Jonathan  Jennings  ^^^^  eminent,  one  as  a  statesman,  the 
was  the  uncompromising  foe  of  slavery  ^^^er  as  an  educator.  Their  diverse  path- 
and  as  such  was  repeatedly  elected  as  dele-  ^^^y^  ^id  not  diminish  their  early  friend- 
gate  to  Congress  before  the  Territory  had  ^y^-^^  ^^.^ich  terminated  only  with  their 
been  clothed  in  the  habiliment  of  State-  i; 

hood.  As  a  native  of  the  State  of  Wil-  j^'  ^j,  admirable  book,  entitled  "Bio- 
ham  Penn,  Mr.  Hendricks  may  without  graphical  and  Historical  Sketches  of  Early 
much  hazard  be  assumed  to  have  been  in  i,,diana,"  William  Wesley  Woollen,  who 
sympathy  with  Mr.  Jennings  on  the  slav-  pj-j^j.  ^^  locating  in  Indianapolis  was  for 
eiy  question.  Public  feeling  ran  high  on  years  a  resident  of  Madison,  the  town  at 
that  issue  in  the  Territory,  and  in  view  of  which  William  Hendricks  established  him- 
the  fact  that  in  each  succeeding  contest  self  and  resided  from  1814  to  the  end  of 
Mr.  Jennings  came  out  of  the  fray  as  vie-  his  useful  life,  in  the  year  1850,  thus 
tor,  the  inference  is  warranted  that  these  speaks  of  the  subject  of  this  sketch: 




"Men  who  found  empires  should  not  be 
forgotten.  They  plant  the  tree  of  civil 
liberty,  and  water  its  roots,  while  those 
who  come  after  them  but  trim  its  branches 
to  preserve  its  symmetry.  If  they  plant 
carelessly  and  in  poor  soil  the  tree  will 
have  but  a  sickly  growth.  That  the  men 
Avho  planted  Indiana  in  the  wilderness 
planted  wisely  and  well  is  evidenced  by  its 
wonderful  growth.  It  was  then  inhabited 
only  by  a  few  thousand  hardy  pioneers 
who  had  settled  on  its  southern  and  east- 
ern borders;  now  it  contains  two  millions 
of  prosperous  people,  its  whole  area  being 
covered  with  happy  homes. 

"William  Hendi'icks  had  as  much  to  do 
with  laying  the  foundations  of  this  great 
State  and  commencing  its  superstructure 
as  any  other  man,  excepting  Jonathan  Jen- 
nings only,  and  yet  how  few  there  are  who 
know  he  ever  lived.  How  transitory  is 
the  fame  of  human  greatness. 

"Worldly  honors  are  not  easily  won,  al- 
though the  bard  tells  us  that  some  men 
have  greatness  thrust  upon  them.  In  the 
contest  for  fame  there  is  sharp  competi- 
tion, and  those  only  win  who  have  endur- 
ance and  mettle.  A  number  of  educated 
and  talented  young  men  had  come  to  In- 
diana in  quest  of  fortune,  and  had  William 
Hendricks  been  a  dolt  or  a  laggard  he 
would  have  been  distanced  in  the  race. 
But  he  was  neither.  He  was  talented  and 
energetic,  and  he  won.  He  also  knew  how 
to  utilize  the  means  at  his  command  and 
to  make  the  most  of  the  situation.  When 
he  came  to  Indiana  he  brought  with  him 
a  printing  press,  and  soon  afterward  com- 
menced the  publication  of  a  weekly  paper. 
It  was  called  the  Eagle,  and,  I  believe,  was 
the  second  newspaper  published  in  the 
State,  the  Vincennes  Sun  being  the  first. 
Through  his  paper  he  became  known  and 
paved  the  way  for  his  political  fortune. 
He  made  the  first  revision  of  the  laws  of 
the  State  and  had  it  printed  on  his  own 
press.  The  Legislature  offered  to  pay  him 
for  this  work,  but  he  declined  all  pecuniary 
compensation.  It  then  passed  a  resolu- 
tion of  thanks,  the  only  return  for  his  la- 
bor he  would  take. 

"Governor  Hendricks  was  a  friend  to 
education.  Hanover  College  and  the  State 
University  at  Bloomington  both  received 
his  fostering  care.  He  took  an  active  in- 
terest in  public  enterprises,  and  frequent- 
ly aided  them  with  his  purse.     He  was 

very  politic  in  his  actions,  never  antagon- 
izing a  man  when  he  could  honorably  avoid 
it.  He  had  a  large  estate,  and  after  leav- 
ing the  Senate  he  spent  his  time  in  manag- 
ing it  and  practicing  law.  He  held  on  to 
his  real  estate  with  great  tenacity,  leasing 
it  for  a  term  of  years  when  practicable, 
instead  of  selling  it.  Many  houses  were 
erected  at  Madison  on  property  leased  of 
him,  and,  like  most  houses  built  under  such 
circumstances,  they  were  poorly  and 
cheaply  constructed.  His  disposition  to 
lease  rather  than  sell  his  property  caused 
much  dissatisfaction  among  the  people, 
and  very  greatly  lessened  his  influence. 

"On  the  16th  of  May,  1850,  Governor 
Hendricks  rode  out  to  his  farm,  just  north 
of  Madison,  to  oversee  the  building  of  a 
family  vault.  While  assisting  in  the  prepa- 
ration of  a  receptacle  for  his  body 
'after  life's  fitful  fever'  was  over,  he  was 
taken  ill  and  soon  afterward  died.  The 
author  is  not  certain  whether  he  died  at 
the  farm  house  or  was  taken  back  to  his 
home  in  the  city,  but  is  inclined  to  the 
opinion  that  he  breathed  his  last  near  the 
spot  where  he  is  buried  and  where  his  re- 
mains have  crumbled  to  dust. 

"Governor  Hendricks  was  of  a  family 
that  occupies  a  front  place  in  the  history 
of  Indiana.  There  is  probably  no  other 
one  in  the  State  that  has  exerted  so  wide 
an  influence  upon  its  politics  and  legisla- 
tion as  his.  His  eldest  son,  John  Abram, 
was  a  captain  in  the  Mexican  war,  and  a 
lieutenant-colonel  in  the  War  of  the  Re- 
bellion. He  was  killed  in  the  battle  of 
Pea  Ridge  while  in  command  of  his  regi- 
ment. Another  son,  Thomas,  was  killed 
in  the  Teche  country  during  General 
Banks'  campaign  up  Red  River.  A  broth- 
er and  a  nephew  sat  in  the  State  Senate, 
and  another  nephew,  Hon.  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks,  has  received  the  highest  hon- 
ors his  State  could  confer  upon  him. 

"Governor  Hendricks  was  about  six  feet 
high  and  had  a  well-proportioned  body. 
He  had  auburn  hair,  blue  eyes  and  a  florid 
complexion.  His  manners  were  easy  and 
dignified,  and  his  address  that  of  a  well- 
bred  gentleman.  He  was  not  a  great  law- 
yer, nor  an  eloquent  advocate,  but  he  pre- 
pared his  cases  with  care  and  was  reason- 
ably successful  at  the  bar.  In  early  life 
he  was  a  Presbyterian,  but  in  his  later 
years  he  joined  the  Methodist  church  and 
died  in  her  communion." 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-19  1 

The  I)idiam  Gazetteer  of  1850  thus 
spoke  of  him :  "Governor  Hendricks  was 
for  many  years  by  far  the  most  popular 
man  in  the  State.  He  had  been  its  sole 
representative  in  Congress  for  six  years, 
elected  on  each  occasion  by  large  majori- 
ties, and  no  member  of  that  body,  prob- 
ably, was  more  attentive  to  the  interests 
of  the  State  he  represented,  or  more  in- 
dustrious in  arranging  all  the  private  or 
local  business  entrusted  to  him.  He  left 
no  letter  unanswered,  no  public  office  or 
document  did  he  fail  to  visit  or  examine 
on  request;  with  personal  manners  very 
engaging,  he  long  retained  his  popularity." 

In  northern  Indiana  there  is  a  thriving 
town,  located  in  Noble  county,  that  was 
laid  out  by  Isaac  Cavin  and  named  Ligo- 
nier.  It  was  in  this  town  that  the  author 
of  this  book  established  the  National  Bari' 
ner  in  May,  1866.  This  paper  is  still  in 
existence,  but  bears  the  name  Ligonier 
Banner.  Like  Mr.  Hendricks,  Isaac 
Cavin  came  to  Indiana  from  the  vicinity 
of  Ligonier,  Westmoreland  county,  Penn- 
sylvania. He  was  a  most  estimable  man 
and  a  highly  successful  farmer  on  the  cele- 
brated "Hawpatch,"  the  garden  spot  of  In- 


When  Governor  Jonathan  Jennings  ac- 
cepted an  election  to  Congress  his  unex- 
pired term  was  filled  by  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Ratliff  Boon.  And  upon  being 
elected  a  second  time  as  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor, in  1822,  he  served  two-thirds  of  his 
term  and  then  resigned.  His  reason  for  re- 
signing was  that  he  wanted  to  go  to  Con- 
gress. He  made  a  successful  race  for  that 
position  in  the  First  district  in  1824,  but 
was  defeated  two  years  later  by  Colonel 
Thomas  H.  Blake.  But  in  four  subsequent 
races  he  was  again  successful.  As  a  Con- 
gressman he  was  quite  active  and  influen- 
tial. During  the  greater  part  of  his  con- 
gressional service  he  was  chairman  of  the 
then  highly  important  committee  on  pub- 

lic lands.  In  1836  he  a.spired  to  a  seat  in 
the  U.  S.  Senate,  antagonizing  Senator 
Hendricks,  who  desired  to  be  re-elected  to 
a  third  term.  The  election  of  a  Whig, 
Oliver  H.  Smith,  was  the  final  outcome  of 
the  contest.  Mr.  Boon  was  a  radical  Jack- 
sonian  Democrat,  though  in  the  earlier 
part  of  his  political  career  he  styled  him- 
self a  Jeffersonian  and  later  on  a  Ben- 
tonian.  His  congressional  career  ended  in 
March,  1839,  and  a  few  months  afterward 
he  moved  from  Indiana  to  Pike  county, 
Missouri.  In  that  State,  then  absolutely 
under  the  sway  of  Thomas  H.  Benton, 
Boon  soon  again  actively  engaged  in  poli- 
tics. He  became  leader  of  the  anti-Benton 
Democrats,  who  were  bent  on  sending  him 
to  Congress.  His  health  had,  however,  be- 
come undermined.  He  was  intensely  anx- 
ious that  James  K.  Polk  be  elected  to  the 
presidency  in  1844.  When  assurance  came 
the  latter  part  of  November  that  Henry 
Clay  was  beaten  and  Polk  triumphantly 
elected,  Ratliff  Boon  expressed  himself 
quite  willing  to  die.  His  spirit  fled  from 
its  tenement  November  20,  1844. 

The  spirit  of  conciliation,  concession 
and  compromise  must  have  been  very 
much  in  evidence  at  the  beginning  of  In- 
diana's State  government.  This  was  espe- 
cially made  manifest  in  the  first  election 
of  U.  S.  Senators,  when  James  Noble  and 
Waller  Taylor  were  chosen.  The  latter 
was  a  pronounced  pro-slavery  man  and  a 
bitter  personal  and  political  enemy  of  Gov- 
ernor Jennings.  When  Indiana  was  still 
a  territory  Judge  Taylor  ran  against  Jen- 
nings for  delegate  to  Congress.  The  con- 
test was  made  an  offensively  bitter  one, 
not  by  Jennings,  but  by  Taylor.  The  lat- 
ter boasted  of  having  publicly  insulted  his 
competitor  and  of  having  done  his  utmost 
to  provoke  the  fighting  of  a  duel.  "Liar, 
sneak,  coward,"  were  some  of  the  choice 
epithets  hurled  at  Jennings,  who,  however, 
maintained  his  equanimity  and  compla- 
cently ignored  the  vituperation  of  his  an- 
tagonist.    It   would   seem   strange,    how- 


19  1 

ever,  that  under  such  circumstances  Wal- 
ler Taylor  could  twice  have  been  chosen  to 
the  exalted  office  of  United  States  Senator. 


As  a  result  of  the  resignation  of  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor Ratliff  Boon,  January  30, 
1824,  James  Brown  Ray,  a  Senator  from 
Franklin  county,  was  chosen  president  pro 
tempore  of  the  Indiana  State  Senate.  He 
presided  over  that  body  to  the  close  of  the 
session,  and  was  again  chosen  to  that  posi- 
tion at  the  beginning  of  the  next  session 
in  January,  1825.  Upon  Governor  Hen- 
dricks' election  to  the  U.  S.  Senate  Mr. 
Ray  became  acting  Governor.  He  was 
then  an  exceedingly  popular  young  man. 
The  following  year  he  became  a  candidate 
for  Governor  and  was,  as  already  stated, 
triumphantly  elected  by  a  majority  of 
2,622  votes  over  the  distinguished  jurist, 
Isaac  Blackford.  Ray's  administration 
must  have  given  measurable  satisfaction, 
for  at  the  next  election,  in  1828 — presi- 
dential year,  when  Andrew  Jackson  was 
triumphantly  elected  to  the  Presidency  of 
the  United  States — Governor  Ray  was  re- 
elected. He  had  two  competitors — Dr. 
Israel  T.  Canby  and  Harbin  H.  Moore. 
Governor  Ray  received  15,141  votes;  Dr. 
Canby,  12,315,  and  Mr.  Moore,  10,904.  He 
held  the  office  until  1831,  when  he  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Noah  Noble. 

The  race  for  the  Lieutenant-Governor- 
ship was  a  remarkably  close  one,  as  ap- 
pears from  these  figures : 

Milton  Stapp 17,895 

Abel  C.  Pepper 17,262 

The  total  vote  for  Governor  exceeded 
this  by  3,000,  the  three  candidates  being 
credited  with  38,360. 

Governor  Ray  became  involved  in  a 
somewhat  acrimonious  controversy  over 
the  appointment  of  supreme  judges.  It 
appears  that  he  had  aspirations  to  go  to 
the  U.  S.  Senate  and  that  two  of  the  judges 
assumed  to  be  justly  entitled  to  i-eappoint- 

ment  were  denied  such  recognition  by  the 
Governor  on  account  of  their  refusal  to 
aid  him  in  his  senatorial  aspirations. 

This  greatly  impaired  his  popularity. 
Prior  thereto  he  had  rendered  himself  un- 
popular by  accepting  an  appointment  as 
commissioner  to  negotiate  a  treaty  with 
the  Miami  and  Pottawatamie  Indians.  The 
constitution  expressly  forbade  a  State  offi- 
cer holding  a  federal  appointment  of  trust 
and  profit.  To  get  around  this  he  request- 
ed that  no  formal  commission  be  issued  to 
him  and  that  he  be  simply  authorized  by 
letter  to  serve  on  the  aforesaid  commission 
in  conjunction  with  Generals  Lewis  Cass 
and  John  Tipton.  This  extraordinary 
procedure  was  sharply  criticised  by  the 
Legislature.  Formal  action  was  taken, 
but  the  matter  was  permitted  to  drag 
along  for  a  time.  A  final  decision  was 
evaded  and  Governor  Ray  was  permitted 
to  resume  the  functions  of  that  office.  It 
was  a  "close  shave,"  this  escape  from  a 
formal  declaration  that  the  office  of  Gov- 
ernor had  been  vacated  by  the  acceptance 
of  an  appointment  to  effect  a  settlement 
with  the  Indians. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  Governor  Ray 
instigated  the  gigantic  internal  improve- 
ment movement  that  subsequently  proved 
so  disastrous  to  the  State,  the  subjoined 
characterization  of  the  man  by  William 
Wesley  Woollen  will  be  adjudged  as  being 
of  more  than  passing  interest: 

"In  Governor  Ray's  messages  to  the 
Legislature  he  argued  forcibly  and  elo- 
quently the  great  advantage  that  must 
accrue  to  Indiana  by  the  construction  and 
operation  of  railroads,  and  predicted  much 
which,  although  at  the  time  seemed 
chimerical,  has  really  come  to  pass.  Many 
considered  him  insane  and  his  utterances 
those  of  a  madman,  but  time  has  demon- 
strated that  in  the  main  he  was  correct. 
He  saw  more  plainly  than  any  other  man 
of  his  day  the  future  of  the  State  in  which 
he  lived.  After  he  left  office  he  contin- 
ued to  dilate  upon  his  favorite  subject,  and 
to  predict  a  great  future  for  Indianapolis. 




A  writer,  who  seems  to  think  the  Governor 
was  somewhat  off  his  mental  balance,  thus 
speaks  of  him  in  a  late  article  in  an  In- 
dianapolis paper: 

During  a  long  period  of  mental  disturbance  in 
his  old  age,  Governor  Ray  was  fond  of  discussing 
his  "grand  scheme"  of  railroad  concentration  at 
Indianapolis.  Here  was  to  be  the  head  of  a  score 
of  radiating  lines.  At  intervals  of  five  miles  were 
to  be  villages,  of  ten  miles  towns,  and  of  twenty 
miles  respectable  cities.  This  crazy  whim,  as 
everybody  regarded  it,  has  been  made  a  fact  as 
solid  as  the  everlasting  hills.  The  only  point  of 
failure  is  the  feature  that  possessed  special  in- 
terest to  the  Governor.  The  Union  Depot  and 
point  of  concentration  of  the  radiating  lines  are 
not  on  his  property,  opposite  the  court  house, 
where,  by  all  the  requirements  of  symmetry  and 
consistency,  they  should  have  been.  Oddly  enough, 
one  expedient  in  construction,  which  certainly 
looked  silly,  has  been  actually  put  in  use  success- 
fully in  some  one  or  another  of  our  far  Western 
lines.  Where  deep  gorges  were  to  be  crossed,  he 
thought  that  trestle-work  might  be  replaced  by 
cutting  ofi^  the  tops  of  growing  trees  level  with 
the  track  and  laying  sills  on  these  for  the  rails. 
It  is  not  many  months  since  the  papers  published 
a  description  of  exactly  that  sort  of  expedients  in 
crossing  a  deep  and  heavily  timbered  hollow  on  a 
Western  railway — the  Denver  &  Rio  Grande  prob- 
ably. So  thoroughly  has  the  great  "hub"  scheme 
and  its  connections  and  incidents  been  identified 
with  Governor  Ray  and  his  hallucinations,  that 
there  are  few  who  know  anything  of  the  matter 
at  all  who  will  not  be  surprised  to  learn  that  the 
origination  of  it  is  at  least  as  likely  to  be  the 
work  of  Governor  Noble's  deliberate  reasoning  as 
of  Governor  Ray's  fantasies.  In  his  annual  mes- 
sage of  1833-4  he  discusses  the  importance  of  the 
internal  improvement  system,  then  projected  and 
widely  debated,  but  not  adopted  by  the  State,  and 
only  partially  pursued  by  the  help  of  canal  land 
grants  by  Congress,  and  he  argues  for  the  con- 
centration of  artificial  facilities  for  transporta- 
tion here.  In  other  words,  without  saying  it,  he 
wants  Indianapolis  to  be  exactly  the  "hub"  that 
Governor  Ray  predicted  it  would  be.  Whether  the 
national  Governor  in  office  got  his  notions  from 
the  fancies  of  the  deranged  ex-Governor,  or  the 
latter  only  expanded  in  his  fantastic  projects  the 
official  suggestion  of  the  other,  we  shall  never 
know.  But  the  probability  is  that  the  sane  Gov- 
ernor profited  by  the  hints  he  saw  in  the  wild 
talk  of  the  insane  Governor.  For  Governor  Noble 
was  not  a  strikingly  original  genius,  and  Gov- 
ernor Ray,  as  eccentric  and  egotistical  as  he  was, 
had  more  than  an  average  allowance  of  brains. 

"After  Governor  Ray  ceased  to  be  Gov- 
ernor he  resumed  the  practice  of  law,  but 
he  did  not  succeed  in  getting  much  legal 
business.  He  seemed  to  have  'run  down 
at  the  heel,'  and,  although  he  was  in  the 

prime  of  life,  the  public  appeared  to  think 
him  .superannuated,  as  having  passed  his 
day  of  usefulness.  In  1835  he  became  a 
candidate  for  clerk  of  Marion  county 
against  Robert  B.  Duncan,  Esq.,  and,  for  a 
time,  seemed  bent  on  making  a  lively  can- 
vass. But,  before  the  election  came  off, 
he  had  virtually  abandoned  the  contest. 
Although  he  did  not  formally  withdraw, 
he  had  no  tickets  printed,  and  when  the 
ballots  were  counted  it  was  found  that 
few  of  them  had  been  cast  for  him.  In 
1887  he  ran  for  Congress,  in  the  Indian- 
apolis district,  against  William  Herrod, 
and  was  defeated,  receiving  but  5,888 
votes  to  his  competitor's  9.635.  This  want 
of  appreciation  by  the  public  .soured  him, 
and  made  him  more  eccentric  than  ever. 

"In  the  summer  of  1848  Governor  Ray 
made  a  trip  to  Wisconsin  and  returned 
home  by  way  of  the  Ohio  river.  While  on 
the  river  he  became  unwell  and,  on  reach- 
ing Cincinnati,  was  taken  to  the  house  of 
a  relative.  The  disease  proved  to  be 
cholera,  and  terminated  in  his  death  Au- 
gust 4,  1848.  He  was  buried  in  Spring 
Grove  Cemetery,  near  Cincinnati,  outside 
the  State  he  had  helped  to  found. 

"In  his  latter  days  Governor  Ray  was 
so  eccentric  that  most  people  thought  his 
mind  diseased.  He  always  walked  with 
a  cane,  and  sometimes  he  would  stop  on 
the  street  and,  with  his  cane,  write  words 
in  the  air.  It  is  no  wonder  that  those  who 
saw  him  do  this  believed  him  insane.  A 
short  time  before  he  died  he  advertised, 
in  an  Indianapolis  paper,  a  farm  and  a 
tavern  stand  for  sale,  and  for  a  proposi- 
tion to  build  a  railroad  from  Charleston, 
S.  C,  through  Indianapolis  to  the  north- 
ern lakes,  all  in  one  advertisement. 

"In  person,  Governor  Ray,  in  his  young- 
er days,  was  very  prepossessing.  He  was 
tall  and  straight,  with  a  body  well-propor- 
tioned. He  wore  his  hair  long  and  tied  in 
a  queue.  His  forehead  was  broad  and 
high,  and  his  features  denoted  intelligence 
of  a  high  order.  For  many  years  he  was 
a  leading  man  of  Indiana,  and  no  full  his- 
tory of  the  State  can  be  written  without 
frequent  mention  of  his  name." 

By  birth  he  was  a  Kentuckian. 


[Chai'ter  IV.] 



y  u  OAH  NOBLE,  the  fourth  elected 

f\  T  ..  Governor  of  Indiana,  was  a  na- 
1 1  \l  ^^^'^  °-^  Virginia,  grew  to  man- 
|1  1  hood  in  Kentucky,  and  located 
'-■■-■'-'"  at  Brookville  about  the  time  In- 
diana was  admitted  into  the 
union.  In  1820  he  was  elected 
sheriff  of  Franklin  county  and  re-elected 
in  1822.  Two  years  later  he  was  chosen 
a  member  of  the  Legislature  virtually 
without  opposition,  only  twenty  votes  hav- 
ing been  cast  against  him.  In  order  to 
guard  against  his  running  for  county 
clerk  the  friends  of  the  incumbent  of  that 
office  suggested  that  Noble  be  groomed  for 
Governor.  The  suggestion  met  with  high 
favor,  and  in  due  course  of  time  he  was 
put  in  training.  He  easily  secured  the 
nomination  by  the  Whig  party,  and  al- 
though Jackson  Democracy  was  largely  in 
the  ascendancy  in  the  State  at  that  time, 
Mr.  Noble  was  elected  by  a  plurality  of 
2,791  over  James  G.  Read,  Democrat,  and 
this  in  face  of  the  fact  that  another  Whig, 
Milton  Stapp  by  name,  was  also  a  candi- 
date for  that  office  and  polled  4,422  votes. 
The  total  vote  for  Governor  cast  at  the 
election  of  1831  reached  37,549,  divided 
as  follows: 


Noah  Noble,  Whig 17,959 

James  G.  Read,  Democrat 15,168 

Milton  Stapp,  Whig 4,422 


David  Wallace,  Whig 17,101 

Ross  Smiley,  Democrat 12,858 

James  Gregory 5,346 

Three  years  later,    in    1834,    Governor 
Noble  successfully  aspired  to  a  re-election. 

He  polled  27,676  votes,  his  Democratic  an- 
tagonist, James  G.  Read,  receiving  19,994. 

For  Lieutenant-Governor  David  Wal- 
lace, Whig,  polled  29,415  votes,  and  David 
V.  Culley,  Democrat,  14,260. 

Shortly  after  his  retirement  from  the 
Governorship  the  Legislature  elected  him 
as  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Public  Im- 
provements. In  1841  he  was  chosen  to  fill 
another  highly  important  position,  that  of 
Fund  Commissioner.  He  was  held  in  high 
esteem  throughout  his  career.  Born  Jan- 
uary 15,  1794,  he  died  in  the  very  prime 
of  life,  February  8,  1844,  near  Indiana- 

What  happened  during  Governor  No- 
ble's two  administrations  is  thus  compre- 
hensively set  forth  in  "A  Century  of  In- 
diana," by  Edward  E.  Moore: 

"Vast  System  of  Internal  Improve- 
ments.— Governor  Noble  was  an  advocate 
of  extensive  public  improvements,  having 
been  elected  on  a  platform  declaration  to 
that  effect.  He  early  began  the  construc- 
tion of  the  Wabash  and  Erie  Canal,  for 
the  promotion  of  which  Congress  had  giv- 
en, in  1827,  a  large  and  valuable  grant  of 
land.  This  canal  was  to  connect  Lake 
Erie  with  the  Wabash  river,  at  a  point  be- 
low which  the  river  would  be  navigable; 
and  in  1836  a  general  system  of  internal 
improvements  having  been  agreed  upon, 
consisting  of  canals,  railroads  and  turn- 
pikes, covering  almost  the  entire  State, 
bonds  were  issued  and  sold  and  contracts 
let.  Then  ensued  an  era  of  great  prosper- 
ity. There  was  employment  for  every- 
body at  profitable  wages,  money  was 
plentiful  and  easy  to  get  and  a  spirit  of 
daring  speculation  and  of  general  extrava- 
gance seized  upon  many  of  the  people  and 
helped  to  embitter  the  unfortunate  experi- 



ences  so  soon  to  follow.  The  future,  with 
these  great  improvements  completed,  was 
pictured  in  exceedingly  bright  colors.  It 
was  thought  by  some  that  the  revenues  to 
be  derived  from  the  railroads  and  canals 
would  not  only  pay  for  their  construction, 
but  would  build  up  such  a  surplus  in  the 
treasury  of  the  State  as  to  relieve  the  peo- 
ple of  all  burdens  of  taxation. 

"The  improvements  undertaken  con- 
sisted of  1,289  miles  of  roads,  railroads 
and  canals  at  an  estimated  cost  of  $19,- 
914,424.  Bonds  for  many  millions  were 
issued  and  sold  and  the  State's  indebted- 
ness by  1841  had  been  pushed  up  to  the 
appalling  aggregate  of  $18,469,146.  The 
total  of  roads  and  canals  completed  up  to 
that  time  amounted  to  only  281  miles. 

"The  State  Embarrassed. — Works  Aban- 
doned and  Compromise  Made  With  Cred- 
itors— The  First  Railroad. — It  very  soon 
became  apparent  that  the  State  had  over- 
estimated its  financial  resources,  and  be- 
fore a  halt  could  be  called  had  involved 
itself  beyond  its  ability  to  pay.  And  to 
make  matters  worse,  the  pall  of  the  great 
panic  of  1837  descended  upon  the  whole 
country,  at  the  very  time  of  the  State's 
greatest  embarrassment.  All  the  works 
had  to  be  abandoned,  bringing  bankruptcy 
to  contractors  and  distress  to  thousands 
of  citizens.  Construction  ceased  entirely 
in  1839. 

"The  State  found  itself  unable  to  pay 
even  the  interest  on  its  indebtedness, 
much  less  to  proceed  further  with  the  im- 
provements. It  finally  entered  into  com- 
promise agreements  with  its  creditors,  re- 
lieving itself  of  a  part  of  the  debt  and  re- 
ducing interest  charges.  The  creditors 
were  permitted  to  take  over  the  unfinished 
improvements  in  part  satisfaction  of  their 
claims,  the  balance  being  paid  in  new 
bonds,  or  treasury  notes.  As  a  rule,  the 
improvements  were  not  completed  by  the 
new  owners,  and  the  State's  vast  expendi- 
tures were  practically  for  naught.  Then 
the  securities  in  the  nature  of  bonds,  and 
certificates  of  stock,  to  possession  of  which 
the  State  was  entitled  under  the  compro- 
mise settlements,  were  not  all  surren- 
dered, and  afterwards  attempts  were 
made  to  exact  payment  of  them.  Claims 
were  also  preferred  on  the  grounds  that 
the  State  had  rendered  the  canal  prop- 
erties valueless  by  granting  franchises  to 
competing    railroads.      Finally,    in    1873, 

after  years  of  agitation  and  bitterness,  an 
amendment  to  the  constitution  was 
adopted  prohibiting  the  Legislature  for  all 
time  from  paying  any  of  these  compro- 
mised debts,  particularly  that  of  the  Wa- 
bash and  Erie  Canal. 

"Of  all  the  vast  projects  undertaken  by 
the  State,  the  Madison  and  Indianapolis 
Railroad  alone  was  fully  completed,  its 
completion  being  accomplished  by  the  as- 
signee company  to  which  the  State  surren- 
dered it.  It  was  the  first  railroad  built 
to  Indianapolis,  its  entrance  into  that  city 
signalizing  the  year  1847.  The  Wabash 
and  Erie  Canal  was  completed  as  far  as 
Lafayette,  and  was  extensively  patronized 
by  the  people  having  surplus  products  to 
transport,  but  the  receipts  from  tolls  were 
not  sufficient  to  maintain  it,  much  less 
produce  dividends  to  apply  on  cost  of  con- 
struction. The  White  Water  Canal  was 
completed  from  Lawrenceburg,  on  the 
Ohio  river,  to  Connersville,  and  its  facil- 
ities for  transportation  purposes  availed 
of  by  the  people  for  many  years. 

"State's  Undertaking  not  Wholly  Unad- 
vised.— It  would  be  very  unfair  for  the 
people  of  this  day,  enjoying  all  of  their 
wonderful  facilities  for  travel  and  com- 
merce and  trade,  to  say  that  the  vast  un- 
dertakings of  1836  were  wholly  unadvised. 
The  question  of  'internal  improvements' 
was  one  of  the  great  issues  of  the  day,  not 
only  in  Indiana,  but  in  other  States,  and 
in  the  country  at  large.  The  Erie  Canal 
in  New  York,  constructed  at  a  cost  of  $7,- 
000,000,  had  proved  itself  a  paying  invest- 
ment and  of  vast  benefit  in  facilitating 
travel,  in  reducing  freight  rates  and  in 
settling  up  the  country.  And  there  were 
many  other  examples  of  profitable  canal 
construction  to  be  held  up  before  the  peo- 
ple by  the  early  '30's.  The  work  was  not 
taken  up  hastily  in  Indiana,  or  without 
discussion.  The  need  was  great,  and  the 
people,  thoroughly  in  earnest,  thought 
they  were  prepared  for  whatever  sacrifice 
was  necessary  to  meet  it.  The  issue  had 
been  before  them  for  a  decade  or  more. 
They  could  not  foresee  the  panic  condi- 
tions which  set  in  in  1837,  nor  the  early 
development  of  the  modern  railroad.  In 
spite  of  the  panic  and  the  financial  break- 
down on  the  part  of  the  State,  most  of  the 
system  of  improvements  planned  would 
have  been  completed  eventually,  and  to 
the  incalculable  benefit  of  the  State,  had 



it  not  been  for  the  coming  of  the  railroads. 
These  early  made  the  canals  useless,  or 
practically  so,  as  their  competition  was 
impotent  against  the  more  rapid  means  of 
transit,  and  their  construction  ceased,  or 
rather  was  not  resumed. 

"The  Surplus  Revenue  Fund.— In  1836 
the  United  States  treasury  found  itself 
overburdened  with  a  large  surplus  fund, 
for  which  there  was  no  immediate  or  pros- 
pective need.  The  national  debt  had  been 
extinguished  and  there  was  no  other  de- 
mand to  be  met  outside  of  the  ordinary 
running  expenses  of  the  Government. 
Hence,  the  question  arose  as  to  what 
should  be  done  with  the  surplus.  After 
much  discussion,  Congress  decided,  by  an 
act  approved  June  23,  1836,  to  deposit  all 
the  fund  but  $5,000,000  with  the  several 
States,  proportioning  it  among  them  on 
the  basis  of  their  representation  in  Con- 
gress. The  total  amount  to  be  thus  dis- 
tributed, in  four  equal  installments,  was 
$37,468,859.  Three  of  the  installments 
were  paid  to  the  various  States,  but  be- 
fore the  fourth  was  due  the  panic  of  1837 
had  paralyzed  the  Government  revenues 
and  no  further  distribution  was  ever 
made.  Indiana's  share  of  the  fund  actual- 
ly distributed  amounted  to  $806,254.44.* 

"It  was  clearly  the  intention  of  the  Gov- 
ernment that  this  transaction  should  be 
considered  merely  in  the  nature  of  a  de- 
posit of  funds  with  the  States,  and  that 
repayment  would  be  required,  but  three- 
quarters  of  a  century  have  passed  without 
any  demand  being  made.  And  although 
the  distribution  was  not  an  equitable  one, 
when  all  sections  of  the  country  are  con- 
sidered, it  is  unlikely,  after  such  a  lapse 
of  time,  that  Congress  will  ever  exact  re- 

"By  an  act  of  the  Legislature  of  1837  it 
was  directed  that  one-half  of  Indiana's 

*D.  H.  Montgomery,  in  his  "Student's  American 
History,"  says  of  the  transaction:  "It  was  styled 
a  'deposit.'  but  it  was  practically  a  gift.  .  .  . 
Some  States  divided  their  share  of  the  money 
among  the  whole  population,  each  person  getting 
a  few  shillings;  others  used  the  money  to  begin 
great  systems  of  roads,  canals,  and  similar  public 
improvements.  These  works  were  seldom  carried 
to  completion,  and  generally  ended  by  piling  up  a 
heavy  State  debt.  A  few  States  still  hold  and  use 
the  income  of  the  money."  All  of  which  would 
indicate  that  Indiana,  by  investing  her  share  for 
the  benefit  of  her  schools,  is  one  among  the  very 
few  States  making  wise  use  of  a  Government 
bounty  so  unwisely  bestowed. 

portion  of  this  'surplus  revenue  fund'  be 
distributed  among  the  counties,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  enumeration  of  male  citi- 
zens twenty-one  years  of  age  and  over,  in 
amounts  not  to  exceed  $400  to  any  one  in- 
dividual, at  8  per  cent,  interest,  and  the 
other  half  inve.sted  in  stock  of  the  State 
Bank.  The  interest  on  the  loans  and  the 
dividends  on  the  bank  stock  were  to  be 
turned  into  the  common  school  fund. 

"Owing  to  the  fact  that  the  first  two  in- 
stallments went  to  the  counties  and  the 
fourth  was  never  paid,  the  fund  was  not 
equallv  divided,  the  counties  receiving 
$537,502.96  and  the  bank  $268,751.48.  Of 
the  latter  sum  $40,000  was  used  to  pay  in- 
terest on  internal  improvement  bonds,  and 
of  the  portion  distributed  to  the  counties 
a  large  percentage  was  lost  through  bad 
loans,  carelessness  in  enforcing  collections 
and  depression  in  values  of  mortgages  and 
other  securities  resulting  from  the  panic 
of  1837.  The  portion  recovered  was 
turned  over  to  the  State  Bank  in  1841,  and 
this,  and  the  original  investment  in  stock 
of  the  bank  proved  so  fortunate,  yielding 
large  and  certain  dividends,  that  the  fund 
more  than  restored  itself.  With  the  clos- 
ing of  the  State  Bank  in  1859,  the  money 
was  transferred  to  the  State  treasury  and 
reinve.sted  through  the  counties  for  the 
benefit  of  the  schools.  It  now  constitutes 
a  very  important  item  of  the  State's  mag- 
nificent common  school  endowment. 

"The  State  Bank  of  Indiana.— The  State 
Bank  of  Indiana,  which  proved  to  be  a 
most  successful  and  stable  institution,  was 
chartered  in  1834.  The  charter  provided 
for  the  establishment  of  twelve  branches 
and  the  thirteenth  was  later  added.  The 
capital  stock  authorized  was  $1,600,000, 
of  which  the  State  agreed  to  subscribe 
one-half.  It  had  a  complete  monopoly,  as 
no  other  banks  were  permitted  to  operate 
in  the  State.  During  the  panic  of  1837  it 
was  compelled  to  suspend  specie  payment 
temporarily,  but  resumed  in  1842,  and 
from  that  date  until  its  charter  expired  in 
1859  it  never  failed  to  meet  all  demands 
upon  it,  and  enjoyed  the  reputation  of  be- 
ing one  of  the  best  managed  and  re- 
liable banking  institutions  in  the  West. 

"Lssue  of  State  Scrip — 'Red  Dog'  and 
'Blue  Pup'  Currency — Days  of  'Wildcat' 
Money. — During  the  stress  of  its  difficul- 
ties attendant  upon  the  collapse  of  the  in- 
ternal improvement  system,  and  the  gen- 


1  6  -  1  9  1  €( 

eral  panic  which  enveloped  the  whole 
country,  Indiana  was  compelled  in  1839  to 
resort  to  the  expedient  of  issuing  State 
scrip.  The  entire  extent  of  such  issue 
amounted  to  $1,500,000.  It  bore  6  per 
cent,  interest  and  was  receivable  for  taxes, 
but  rapidly  depreciated  until  its  market 
value  was  only  40  to  50  cents  on  the  dollar. 
It  was  printed  on  red  paper,  and  the  peo- 
ple desrisively  called  it  'red  dog'  currency. 
It  was  finally  redeemed  and  was  worth  a 
large  premium  at  the  last,  due  partly  to 
the  restoration  of  confidence  in  the  finan- 
cial integrity  of  the  State  and  partly  to  the 
accumulated  interest. 

"Before  the  panic  was  over  merchants, 
plank-road  contractors  and  others  resorted 
to  the  issuance  of  private  scrip.  It  is 
needless  to  say  that  its  circulating  value 
also  quickly  fell  below  par,  and  taking 
their  cue  from  the  fact  that  it  was  printed 
mostly  on  blue  paper,  the  people  called  it 
'blue  pup'  currency,  as  distinguished 
from  the  State's  'red  dog'  currency. 
Much  of  the  private  scrip  was  redeemable 
only  in  trade,  or  merchandise,  or  toll  on 
the  plank  roads.  The  State  was  flooded 
with  'wildcat'  currency  in  the  form  of  de- 
preciated paper  put  out  by  'banks  of 
issue'  in  surrounding  States,  which  drove 
good  money  out  of  circulation." 


Sons  of  Pennsylvania  seem  to  have  been 
in  favor  with  the  voters  of  the  young  Com- 
monwealth of  Indiana,  as  made  manifest 
in  the  choice  of  Governors.  David  Wal- 
lace, who  succeeded  Noah  Noble  in  the 
gubernatorial  chair,  1837,  was  born  in 
Mifflin  county,  Pennsylvania,  April  24, 
1799.  General  Harrison  was  instrumental 
in  having  young  Wallace  made  a  cadet  at 
West  Point.  Graduated  in  1821,  he  be- 
came a  tutor  in  that  institution,  serving 
as  such  a  short  time,  then  enlisting  in  the 
army  as  lieutenant  of  artillery.  His  father 
having  located  in  Brookville,  that  pictur- 
esque Indiana  town  became  his  place  of 
residence.  He  studied  law,  and  several 
years  after  his  admission  to  the  bar  was 
elected  to  the  Legislature  three  times  in 
succession— 1828,  1829  and  1830.  In  1831 
he  was  elected  Lieutenant-Governor  and 

re-elected  in  1834.  It  is  said  that  as  pre- 
siding officer  of  the  State  he  had  few 
equals  and  no  superior.  In  recognition  of 
his  demonstrated  ability,  his  party 
(Whig)  nominated  him  for  Governor. 
His  Democratic  competitor  was  John  Du- 
mont,  an  able  and  distinguished  lawyer 
residing  at  Vevay,  on  the  southern  border 
of  the  State.  The  vote  stood:  Wallace, 
45,240;  Dumont,  36,197.  For  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  David  Willis,  Whig,  had  48,823 ; 
Alexander  S.  Burnett,  Democrat,  22,311. 
Elected  as  a  champion  of  the  internal 
improvement  policy,  inaugurated  by  his 
predecessors,  Governor  Wallace  did  his  ut- 
most to  make  that  undertaking  a  success. 
With  all  the  ability  and  resourcefulness  at 
his  command,  he  found  himself  unable  to 
save  from  wreckage  the  stupendous  en- 
terprises into  which  the  State  had  been 
lured  by  enthusiasts  and  visionaries — 
well-meaning,  it  is  true,  but  woefully  un- 
mindful of  that  cautionary  admonition, 
"look  before  you  leap."  Having  done  his 
best,  his  party  turned  him  the  cold  shoul- 
der when  he  sought  a  renomination 
in  1840.  With  characteristic  ingrati- 
tude for  service  well  rendered,  the 
Whig  convention  of  1840  nominated 
for  Governor  Samuel  Bigger,  a  gen- 
tleman who  had  been  prominently 
identified  with  the  internal  improve- 
ment scheme  of  that  decade.  Without  a 
murmur  of  complaint,  Governor  Wallace 
accepted  defeat,  and  at  the  completion  of 
his  term  of  office  resumed  the  practice  of 
law.  A  year  after  he  was  elected  to  Con- 
gress from  the  Indianapolis  district,  de- 
feating the  popular  Colonel  Nathan  B. 
Palmer.  Seeking  a  re-election  in  1843,  he 
met  with  defeat  at  the  hands  of  William 
J.  Brown,  who  beat  him  by  1,085  votes. 
The  demoralization  of  the  Whig  party  by 
the  political  defection  of  President  John 
Tyler  doubtless  had  much  to  do  with 
bringing  about  this  result.  Undaunted 
by  political  adversity,  he  pursued  assidu- 
ously the  practice  of  his  profession.     In 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

1846  he  permitted  himself  to  be  made 
Chairman  of  the  Whig  State  Committee, 
and  in  1850  he  was  made  a  member  of  the 
Constitutional  Convention  that  framed 
the  organic  law  under  which  Indiana  still 
operates  its  governmental  machinery. 
Despite  his  superb  ability  as  a  debater,  he 
took  but  little  part  in  the  delibei'ations  of 
that  body.  This  occasioned  grievous  dis- 
appointment to  his  friends  and  admirers. 
The  most  noteworthy  statement  credited 
to  him  in  the  records  of  the  Constitutional 
Convention  is  the  declaration  that  while  a 
member  of  Congress  he  voted  for  the  ex- 
pulsion from  that  body  of  the  high  priest 
of  abolitionism,  Joshua  R.  Giddings,  on 
account  of  his  persistence  in  stirring  up 
sectional  animosity  between  North  and 
South.  Giddings  then  represented  the 
famous  "Western  Reserve"  (of  Ohio)  in 
Congress  and  took  high  rank  as  one  of  the 
most  outspoken  and  defiant  anti-slavery 
agitators  of  the  land.  The  last  official  po- 
sition filled  by  Governor  Wallace  was  that 
of  Judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  to 
which  he  was  elected  in  1856  and  which  he 
filled  with  marked  ability.  He  died  sud- 
denly on  the  4th  of  September,  1859.  In 
eulogy  he  was  declared  to  have  been  "a 
just  judge — firm,  upright,  clear,  patient, 
laborious,  impartial  and  conscientious"- — 
certainly  a  very  high  and  appreciable 
tribute  to  honesty,  integrity  and  efficiency. 
His  oratory  was  of  the  choicest  phrase- 
ology and  of  inspiring  delivery. 


A  native  of  Ohio  succeeded,  in  1840,  a 
native  of  Pennsylvania  as  Governor  of  In- 
diana. His  name  was  Samuel  Bigger,  a 
product  of  Warren  county,  Ohio,  born 
March  20,  1802.  He  was  the  son  of  John 
Bigger,  a  Western  pioneer,  and  for  many 
years  a  member  of  the  Ohio  Legislature. 
Though  reared  on  a  farm,  he  was  frail  of 
body,  too  delicate  to  perform  manual  la- 
bor.   Accordingly  he  was  prepared  for  col- 

lege. As  the  result  of  earnest  applica- 
tion to  his  studies  he  graduated  from 
Athens  University  and  then  fitted  himself 
for  the  legal  profession.  In  1829  he 
moved  to  Liberty,  Ind.,  where  he  practiced 
law  for  a  short  time,  and  then  located  at 
Rushville.  Like  other  Indiana  lawyers,  he 
sought  and  secured  a  seat  in  the  Legisla- 
ture, being  first  elected  in  1834  and  re- 
elected in  1835.  The  first  year  of  his  legis- 
lative career  he  sought  to  be  elected 
Speaker,  but  was  defeated  by  Colonel 
James  Gregory  by  a  39  to  37  vote.  After 
his  legislative  service  he  became  a  judge 
of  his  judicial  circuit.  In  this  position  he 
made  a  creditable  record.  The  reputation 
thus  gained  secured  him  the  Whig  nom- 
ination for  Governor  in  1840  over  Gov- 
ernor Wallace,  a  much  abler  man  and  a 
far  more  forceful  and  eloquent  public 
speaker.  The  campaign  was  a  most  excit- 
ing one.  It  was  the  famous  "Tippecanoe 
and  Tyler  too"  campaign,  in  which  figured 
conspicuously  and  fantastically  the  log 
cabin,  hard  cider  and  coon  skins.  General 
Harrison  was  immensely  popular  in  In- 
diana, having  for  years  been  its  Terri- 
torial Governor.  Though  Indiana  had 
three  times  voted  for  "Old  Hickory"  for 
the  Presidency,  it  refused  to  give  its  elec- 
toral vote  to  Jackson's  legatee,  Martin 
Van  Buren,  either  in  1836  or  in  1840. 


The  Dem.ocrats  had  as  their  candidate 
for  Governor  an  exceptionally  able,  strong 
and  good  man  in  the  person  of  General 
Tilghman  A.  Howard,  then  a  member  of 
Congress  from  the  seventh  district.  He 
was  a  native  of  South  Carolina,  but  his 
boyhood  days  were  spent  in  North  Caro- 
lina until  he  was  nineteen  years  of  age. 
Fascinated  by  the  picturesque  scenery  of 
East  Tennessee,  he  located  in  that  part  of 
the  Union,  following  the  pursuit  of  a 
school  teacher  and  then  of  a  merchant's 
clerk.  He  drifted  into  a  law  office,  and  at 
the  age   of  twenty-one  was   admitted   to 


19  16 

the  bar.  Having  developed  high  qualities 
as  a  public  speaker,  an  appreciative  elec- 
torate made  him,  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
seven,  a  State  Senator.  In  this  capacity- 
he  soon  won  prominence  and  distinction, 
so  much  so  that  he  was  placed  upon  the 
Jackson  electoral  ticket  in  1828  and  tri- 
umphantly elected.  Two  years  later  he 
became  a  resident  of  Indiana,  locating  at 
Bloomington,  where  he  opened  a  law  ofRce 
and  soon  after  formed  a  copartnership 
with  James  Whitcomb,  who,  in  the  follow- 
ing decade,  became  Governor  and  later  on 
United  States  Senator.  After  a  residence 
of  about  three  years  at  Bloomington, 
Howard  concluded  that  the  town  of  Rock- 
ville,  in  Parke  county,  would  prove  a  more 
advantageous  location  for  him.  He,  how- 
ever, continued  his  business  relations  with 
Mr.  Whitcomb  until  1836,  when  he  dis- 
solved it  and  associated  himself  with 
Judge  William  P.  Bryant.  This  connec- 
tion continued  three  years,  when  Judge 
Bryant  withdrew  from  the  firm.  His  place 
was  taken  by  Joseph  A.  Wright,  who,  like 
Mr.  Whitcomb,  also  in  later  years  became 
Governor,  and  for  a  short  time  United 
States  Senator.  This  combination  of  tal- 
ent continued  up  to  the  time  of  Howard's 

As  an  ardent  supporter  of  "Old  Hick- 
ory," Howard  was  appointed  United 
States  District  Attorney  for  Indiana  in 
1832.  This  important  office  he  held  for 
seven  years.  In  1839  he  made  the  race 
for  a  seat  in  Congress  and  was  tri- 
umphantly elected.  His  district  com- 
prised nineteen  counties  in  the  western 
and  northern  parts  of  the  State,  extending 
clear  over  to  Michigan  City.  Contrary  to 
his  wishes  he  was  made  the  Democratic 
nominee  for  Governor  in  1840.  He  en- 
tered upon  a  very  vigorous  campaign,  at 
the  close  of  which  he  was  worn  down  by 
fatigue  and  disease.  Yet  he  murmured 
not.  His  strong  religious  faith  lent  him 
stamina  and  afforded  him  serene  buoyancy 
even  in  the  hour  of  defeat,  distress  and 

disaster.  In  the  truest  sense  of  the  word 
he  was  a  Christian  gentleman  of  steadfast 

During  the  time  he  served  as  District 
Attorney  of  Indiana  it  became  necessary 
for  the  Jackson  administration,  in  1835, 
to  appoint  a  commissioner  for  the  purpose 
of  adjusting  and  settling  a  number  of 
claims  against  the  Government  growing 
out  of  treaties  with  the  Indians.  This 
task  was  considered  one  of  unusual 
delicacy  and  of  utmost  importance.  There 
was  much  difference  of  opinion  among 
President  Jackson's  cabinet  officers  as  to 
who  should  be  selected  for  this  position, 
when  "Old  Hickory"  himself  solved  the 
problem  by  suggesting  Tilghman  A. 
Howard  as  the  very  man  needed  and  best 
suited  for  this  difficult  task.  Needless  to 
say  that  the  selection  fully  met  the  expec- 
tations of  the  administration.  General 
Howard  proved  himself  the  right  man  in 
the  right  place — the  very  soul  of  honor 
and  integrity. 

While  serving  as  a  member  of  Congress, 
and  after  having  been  selected  to  make  the 
race  for  Governor,  the  suggestion  was 
made,  the  latter  part  of  May,  1840,  that 
some  sort  of  State  demonstration  be  made 
in  his  behalf  at  Indianapolis,  including  a 
dinner.  To  this  suggestion  he  made  this 
characteristic  reply: 

"I  have  considered  the  matter.  It  is  not 
democratic,  and  would  be,  to  a  certain  ex- 
tent, imitating  the  folly  of  our  antago- 
nists. Freemen  ought  to  meet  together  to 
reason  on  public  interests  when  they  as- 
semble for  political  effect,  and  allow  me 
to  say  to  you  that  the  mass  of  our  people 
will  not  be  any  the  more  zealous  by  any 
public  demonstration.  They  will  turn  out 
to  hear  debate.  I  shall  have  as  many  as 
I  deserve  to  have  to  hear  me,  and  my  wish 
is  to  have  no  demonstration,  no  proces- 
sion, no  flags,  no  drums,  nor  any  other 
exhibition  unworthy  of  a  free,  thinking, 
orderly  community.  I  shall  leave  here  at 
the  very  earliest  day  and  hurry  home  and 
you  may  rely  on  it  I  will  be  at  several 
points  yet  in  Indiana  before  the  election 
(in  August).     Allow    my    suggestion    to 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

prevail.  Let  us  be  what  Democracy  should 
be,  too  independent  to  be  deceived  by 
shows  or  led  away  by  them;  possessing 
too  much  respect  for  our  fellow-men  to  at- 
tempt to  mislead  them  on  those  great  sub- 
jects that  concern  the  general  happiness." 

The  Legislature  chosen  in  1842  having 
a  United  States  Senator  to  elect,  the  can- 
vass of  that  year  was  made  mainly  upon 
that  issue.  The  Whigs  supported  Oliver 
H.  Smith,  and  the  Democrats  General 
Howard.  No  other  man  was  spoken  of  in 
connection  with  the  office  until  after  the 
Legislature  met.  The  two  candidates  met 
just  before  the  Legislature  convened  and 
had  a  talk  about  the  Senatorship.  General 
Howard  said  to  Mr.  Smith  that  he  knew 
one  of  them  would  be  elected  if  the  will  of 
the  people  was  carried  out.  "But,"  said 
he,  "the  vote  will  be  so  close  that  a  man  or 
two  may  be  found  who,  like  Judas,  would 
sell  his  party  for  a  few  pieces  of  silver. 
There  is  nothing  certain."  That  General 
Howard  was  correct  events  proved.  On 
the  first  ballot  he  received  74  votes,  Mr. 
Smith  72  votes,  Edward  A.  Hannegan 
3  votes  and  Joseph  G.  Marshall  1  vote.  It 
will  be  seen  that  Howard  lacked  two  votes 
of  election.  It  was  said  at  the  time  these 
votes  were  offered  him  if  he  would  promise 
office  to  the  givers,  but  he  scorned  the 
proffer.  On  the  sixth  ballot  Mr.  Hanne- 
gan was  elected.  General  Howard  having 
withdrawn  from  the  contest. 

In  the  summer  of  1844  General  Howard 
was  appointed  by  President  Tyler  Charge 
d'Affaires  to  the  Republic  of  Texas.  He 
left  home  on  the  Fourth  of  July  and 
reached  Washington,  the  capital  of  Texas, 
August  1,  1844.  In  a  few  days  he  was 
taken  sick  with  fever,  and  in  fifteen  days 
from  the  time  of  his  arrival  he  died.  He 
breathed  his  last  at  the  house  of  John  Far- 
quher,  a  few  miles  from  Washington.  He 
was  buried  in  Texas,  and  for  three  years 
his  remains  rested  in  that  far-off-  country. 

Adopting  the  language  of  William  Wes- 
ley Woollen,  "General  Howard  was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Presbyterian  church,   but  he 

was  not  a  sectarian.  He  believed  there 
were  many  branches  of  the  same  vine, 
many  paths  leading  to  the  straight  gate. 
He  was  too  great  to  be  a  bigot,  too  good  to 
have  no  charity." 

General  Howard  was  always  dignified 
in  public.  He  seldom  indulged  in  levity; 
but  notwithstanding  this,  he  had  the  fac- 
ulty of  drawing  all  classes  of  men  to  him. 
The  sober  and  the  gay,  the  lettered  and 
the  unlettered  alike  followed  his  fortunes. 

Although  General  Howard  never  at- 
tended an  academy  or  a  college,  he  was  a 
very  learned  man.  He  was  acquainted 
with  the  civil  law,  with  theology,  history, 
politics,  geology,  mineralogy,  botany, 
philosophy  and  the  occult  sciences.  His 
mind  was  a  vast  storehouse  of  knowledge, 
it  being  questionable  if  there  was  another 
man  in  the  State  of  such  information 
as  he. 

During  the  canvass  of  1840  a  newspaper 
published  at  Greencastle  sought  to  make 
political  capital  against  General  Howard 
by  commenting  upon  his  well-known 
opinions  on  temperance.  When  he  spoke 
in  that  town  he  read  the  article  and  told 
the  editor  to  get  out  another  edition  of  his 
paper  and  throw  it  broadcast  over  the 
State.  "I  want  every  voter  to  know  my 
opinions  on  this  question,"  said  Howard. 
"I  am  willing  to  stand  by  them,  and,  if 
need  be,  fall  by  them." 

In  a  debate  with  a  gentleman  who 
evaded  the  issues  and  went  out  after  side 
ones.  General  Howard  told  the  following 
story,  and  applied  it  to  his  opponent: 
"Once,"  said  he,  "a  representative  from 
Buncombe  county  made  a  speech  in  the 
North  Carolina  Legislature,  in  which  he 
talked  of  many  things  entirely  foreign  to 
the  matter  before  the  House,  and  on  be- 
ing called  to  order  by  the  Speaker,  and 
told  to  confine  himself  to  the  question  at 
issue,  replied :  'My  speech  is  not  for  the 
Legislature;  it  is  all  for  Buncombe.'  "  "All 
for  Buncombe"  became  a  common  saying, 
and  has  remained  such  to  the  present  day. 


19  1 

As  has  already  been  stated,  General 
Howard  died  and  was  buried  in  Texas. 
But  the  people  of  Indiana  were  not  willing 
that  his  dust  should  commingle  with  for- 
eign soil.  The  Legislature  of  1847  passed 
an  act  directing  the  Governor  and  Gen- 
eral Joseph  Lane  "to  have  the  remains  of 
Tilghman  A.  Howard  removed  from  their 
place  of  burial  in  Texas  and  reinterred  at 
such  place  in  Indiana  as  his  family  might 
desire."  The  act  was  approved  by  his 
friend  and  former  partner,  James  Whit- 
comb,  then  Governor  of  the  State.  The 
will  of  the  Legislature  was  carried  out, 
and  the  remains  of  Howard  disinterred 
and  brought  to  Indiana.  They  remained  a 
while  at  Indianapolis,  receiving  high 
honors.  From  thence  they  were  taken 
to  Greencastle,  where  like  honors 
awaited  them.  They  were  then  removed 
to  Rockville,  his  old  home,  and  interred  in 
his  orchard.  Previous  to  placing  the  coffin 
in  the  ground,  Professor  William  C.  Lar- 
rabee,  afterward  Indiana's  first  Superin- 
tendent of  Public  Instruction,  delivered  a 
eulogy  upon  the  dead  statesman,  replete 
with  beautiful  thoughts.  It  closed  as  fol- 

"Take  him  and  bury  him  among  you. 
Bury  him  where  the  primrose  and  the 
violet  bloom  in  vernal  beauty,  where  the 
rose  of  summer  sheds  its  fragrance,  and 
where  the  leaves  of  autumn  fall,  to  pro- 
tect the  spot  from  the  cheerless  blast  of 
the  wintry  winds.  Bury  him  in  that  rural 
bower  on  the  hillside,  within  sight  of  his 
quiet  cottage  home.    Bury  him  by  the  side 

of  the  pretty  child  he  loved  so  well — the 
beauteous  little  girl,  who,  years  ago,  died 
suddenly  when  the  father  was  away  from 
home.  Bury  him  now  by  her,  that  child 
and  father  may  sleep  side  by  side.  Ye 
need  erect  no  costly  monument,  with  la- 
bored inscription,  over  his  grave.  On  a 
plain  stone  inscribe  the  name  of  Howard, 
of  Indiana's  Howard,  and  it  shall  be 

Senator  David  Turpie  pronounced 
Tilghman  A.  Howard  "A  man  of  rare  ca- 
pacity, wisdom  and  discretion,  and  of 
singular  purity  of  life  and  morals.  Even 
the  venial  excesses  so  common  in  the  cus- 
toms of  that  time,  and  so  often  indulged 
in  by  those  engaged  in  public  life,  he  care- 
fully avoided.  Wholly  free  from  cant, 
without  the  slightest  trace  of  the  formal- 
ist or  Pharisee  in  his  demeanor,  he  yet 
would  not  in  these  things  conform,  but 
went  his  own  way,  as  he  had  chosen. 
.  .  .  Many  persons  have  spoken  to  me 
of  Mr.  Howard,  and  all  have  made  mention 
of  the  depth  and  sincerity  of  his  religious 
convictions.  In  every  circumstance  of 
life  he  acted  as  if  he  were  in  the  presence 
and  under  the  protection  of  his  Maker — 
not,  as  he  believed,  that  general  care  taken 
of  the  young  ravens  or  of  the  sparrows  in 
their  fall,  but  that  concern  more  immedi- 
ate, spoken  of  by  the  Psalmist  of  the 
Friends : 

"  'I  know  not  where  His  islands  lift 
Their  fronded  palms  in  air, 

I  only  know  I  cannot  drift 
Beyond  His  love  and  care.'  " 

[Chapter  V.] 



EFORE  proceeding  to  a  review 
of  the  "Tippecanoe  and  Tyler 
too"  campaign  of  1840,  it  is 
quite  important  and  essential 
to  a  clear  understanding  of  the 
situation  that  some  attention  be 
given  to  the  financial  and  in- 
dustrial condition  of  the  country,  to  the 
questions  of  moment  upon  which  there 
was  marked  division  of  public  opinion, 
and  the  causes  that  led  to  a  crystallization 
of  the  forces  of  opposition  to  the  Van 
Buren  administration. 

As  tersely  yet  comprehensively  epitom- 
ized by  General  Thomas  E.  Powell,  the 
United  States  Bank,  in  the  year  1816,  re- 

"A  charter  for  twenty  years.  The 
law  that  created  the  bank  also  provided 
that  the  national  revenue  should  be  de- 
posited in  that  bank  to  be  paid  out  by  it 
in  accordance  with  directions  it  should  re- 
ceive from  time  to  time  from  the  Treas- 
ury Department.  The  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  had,  however,  the  right  to  re- 
move these  deposits  whenever,  in  his 
judgment,  the  public  interest  demanded 
the  change.  The  intention  of  the  law  un- 
questionably was  that  the  national  de- 
posits should  be  continued  in  the  bank  as 
long  as  the  bank  continued  to  be  a  safe  de- 
pository and  performed  its  duties  accord- 
ing to  law.  In  his  message  to  Congress  in 
1829,  1830  and  1831,  President  Jackson 
expressed  strong  dislike  of  the  United 
States  Bank.  A  great  many  people  in  the 
country  were  in  favor  of  continuing  the 
bank,  and  Jackson's  political  opponents 
conceived  the  idea  that  if  the  bank  were 
rechartered  it  would  hamper  Jackson  in 
the  Presidential  election  of  1832.  Henry 
Clay  was  at  that  time  endeavoring  to  clear 
his  own  path  to  the  Presidency;  conse- 
quently he  favored  the  rechartering  of  the 
bank,  hoping  thereby  to  handicap  Jack- 

"Under  the  fine  manipulation  of  Clay, 
both  Houses  of  Congress,  in  the  winter  of 
1832,  passed  a  bill  providing  for  the  re- 
newal of  the  charter  of  the  bank.  Presi- 
dent Jackson  promptly  vetoed  the  bill. 
His  opponents  had  felt  sure  that  he  would 
not  venture  to  take  this  step.  They 
thought  it  would  make  him  enemies  and 
increase  the  strength  of  the  National  Re- 
publicans, of  which  Clay  was  the  leader. 
In  the  next  Congress,  however,  Jackson 
had  a  majority  of  his  own  supporters  and 
no  further  attempt  was  made  to  renew 
the  charter  of  the  bank. 

"The  bank's  charter  would  not  expire 
until  1836,  but  the  fight  being  on,  Jack- 
son was  not  willing  to  allow  the  bank  to 
die  a  natural  death.  He  therefore  decided 
to  remove  the  national  deposits,  giving  as 
his  reason  for  this  act  that  they  were  un- 
safe in  the  United  States  Bank.  He 
brought  the  matter  before  Congress  dur- 
ing the  session  of  1833.  But  the  House 
of  Representatives  expressed  an  aversion 
to  the  project.  He  then  brought  the  mat- 
ter up  in  his  Cabinet,  but  Duane,  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Treasury,  firmly  declared 
he  could  not  conscientiously  consent  to  the 
measure.  Then,  as  Duane  would  not  re- 
move the  deposits.  President  Jackson  re- 
moved Duane  and  appointed  Roger  B. 
Taney  in  his  stead.  Secretary  Taney  at 
once  issued  an  order  for  the  removal  of 
the  deposits  from  the  National  Bank  to 
the  State  banks.  The  banks  to  which  the 
deposits  were  distributed  immediately  be- 
came known  as  'pet  banks.' 

"The  National  Republicans  all  over  the 
country  were  loud  in  their  denunciations 
of  Jackson,  and  the  managers  of  the 
United  States  Bank  at  once  set  out  for  re- 
venge, and  for  financial  self-protection. 
They  proceeded  to  call  in  their  loans  and 
then  restricted  discounts.  Inside  of  a  few 
months  they  had  forced  the  collection  of 
many  millions  of  dollars.  They  knew  the 
efi"ect  this  would  have  upon  the  country, 
but  the  managers  of  the  bank  declared 
that  they  had  made  their  loans   on  the 

(65  ) 


19  1 

credit  of  the  Government  deposits,  and 
this  being  withdrawn,  they  were  com- 
pelled to  call  in  their  loans.  The  result 
was  financial  troubles  in  the  winter  of 
1836  and  such  men  as  Daniel  Webster  and 
Henry  Clay  laid  the  responsibility  for 
these  troubles  at  the  President's  door. 
Jackson  was  denounced  all  over  the  land 
as  high-handed  and  tyrannical,  and  he 
was  charged  with  taking  control  of  the 
National  Treasury,  of  which  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  in  Congress  were 
the  constitutional  guardians.  Meanwhile 
the  State  banks  which  had  received  the 
surplus  revenue  regarded  it  as  a  perma- 
nent deposit,  capital  in  short,  and  pro- 
ceeded to  enlarge  their  operations  accord- 
ingly. So  it  came  about  that  men  who 
were  permitted  to  borrow  from  the  State 
banks  what  they  actually  needed  could 
now  borrow  what  they  might  wish.  Spec- 
ulation largely  increased;  Western  lands, 
steamboat  lines,  new  roads,  suburban 
tracts,  any  project  which  the  speculator 
might  present,  found  ready  investors,  and 
thus  the  destruction  of  the  United  States 
Bank  led  directly  to  the  panic  of  1837. 

"The  usual  causes  which  have  produced 
so  many  and  almost  periodical  monetary 
depressions  in  our  history  played  their 
part  in  the  panic  of  1837,  and  prominent 
among  them  were  speculation,  undue  ex- 
tension of  credits,  unproductive  invest- 
ments and  large,  unwarranted  expendi- 

"It  should  also  be  mentioned  that  an 
element  of  disturbance  was  projected  into 
the  financial  situation  in  1834  when  an  act 
of  Congress  changed  the  relative  values  of 
gold  and  silver  from  fifteen  to  one  to  six- 
teen to  one  in  order  to  promote  the  cir- 
culation of  gold.  Besides  all  this  the 
financial  stringency  in  England,  France, 
Belgium  and  over  the  continent  of  Europe 
generally  tended  to  aggravate  the  situa- 
tion in  the  United  States. 

"The  distribution  of  public  funds  to  pet 
banks  caused  those  institutions  to  encour- 
age customers  to  borrow  money.  This  led 
to  speculation  in  all  kinds  of  projects,  the 
most  important  of  which  was  Western 
lands.  These  lands  were  purchased  by 
speculators,  paid  for  in  notes,  sold  at  an 
advance  to  another  speculator  and  again 
paid  for  in  notes ;  the  operations  to  be  re- 
peated over  and  over  as  the  boom  in  val- 
ues progressed.     Labor  was  drawn  from 

productive  to  unproductive  work;  men 
rich  in  bonds,  soon  to  be  worthless,  ac- 
cumulated debts  beyond  all  reason. 

"This  speculation  in  public  lands  swift- 
ly grew  to  enormous  proportions.  In  1829 
the  sale  of  public  lands  amounted  to  a 
little  over  $1,500,000.  In  1830  it  was 
$2,300,000;  in  1832  $2,600,000;  in  1833 
$3,900,000;  in  1834  $4,800,000;  in  1835 
$14,757,000;  in  1836  $24,877,000.  In  1836 
President  Jackson  determined  to  check 
the  wild  speculation  which  had  developed 
all  over  the  land.  To  do  so  he  issued  an 
order  that  the  land  oflSces  should  receive 
nothing  but  gold  and  silver  or  certificates 
of  deposit  in  specie  in  the  United  States 
Treasury  in  payment  for  land.  The  law 
at  that  time  was  that  all  except  actual  set- 
tlers should  pay  for  land  in  gold  or  silver, 
but  the  law  was  not  maintained.  In  that 
year  the  Government  deposits  with  the 
'pet  banks'  had  reached  the  sum  of  $41,- 
500,000.  As  soon  as  Jackson  issued  his 
specie  circular  Congress  ordered  the 
money  in  the  banks  to  be  distributed 
among  the  several  States  in  proportion  to 
the  number  of  Presidential  electors  to 
which  each  State  was  entitled,  the  money 
to  be  used  for  internal  improvements. 
Now  the  banks  had  looked  upon  this 
money  as  a  permanent  deposit  and  had 
loaned  it  to  customers.  With  vaults  full 
of  paper  securities,  how  could  they  pay 
in  gold?  The  gold  had  disappeared  and 
in  its  place  was  paper,  which,  when  the 
crisis  came,  nobody  would  take.  The 
order  of  Congress  therefore  embarrassed 
the  banks,  crippled  the  speculators,  with- 
drew money  from  circulation  and  pre- 
cipitated the  terrible  financial  calamity  of 

"The  specie  circular  tied  up  the  public ; 
the  distribution  of  the  Treasury  surplus 
to  the  States  tied  up  the  banks.  Loans 
had  to  be  called  in  and  accommodations  to 
business  men  were  greatly  restricted.  In 
March,  1837,  England  began  to  look  to 
America  for  remittances  of  specie  through 
bills  on  American  houses.  American 
houses  were  not  able  to  pay  their  bills  in 
specie,  and  from  April  1  to  April  10 
more  than  one  hundred  failures  occurred 
in  New  York  City.  Before  the  end  of 
April  the  failures  were  too  numerous  to 
be  recorded.  From  the  metropolis  the 
commercial  paralysis  spread  all  over  the 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

"It  then  became  apparent  that  to  survey 
the  wilderness  did  not  convert  it  into 
farms  nor  would  platting  farms  build 
cities.  The  spirit  of  speculation  had  pro- 
duced in  the  public  mind  a  state  of  en- 
chantment like  that  of  the  poet,  Bryant, 
when  he  wrote  'The  Prairie.'  Standing 
upon  an  uninhabited  tract  his  fancy  ran 
riot  until  he  not  only  saw  cultivated  fields 
and  populous  cities,  but  heard  the  voices 
of  people  yet  to  be.  When  he  became 
hungry  he  went  back  to  dinner.  So  it  was 
with  the  people  of  this  country  in  1837. 
They  were  rich  on  paper  and  in  prospects 
yet  to  be  realized.  When  they  had  to  have 
three  meals  a  day,  wear  clothes  and  pay 
notes  at  the  bank  they  found  it  necessary 
to  get  back  to  cold  facts.  The  only  facts 
which  were  of  any  use  when  disaster  came 
were  gold  and  silver.  These  could  be  ob- 
tained only  by  earning  them,  and  as  that 
would  take  time  the  disaster  could  not  be 
averted.  That  wild  speculation  in  land 
was  a  large  contributing  cause  to  the 
panic  is  plainly  indicated  by  the  fact  that 
in  1842  sales  of  land  had  fallen  to  less 
than  one  and  a  half  million  dollars  from 
twenty-five  millions  in  1836. 

"President  Van  Buren  was  importuned 
to  have  the  Government  interfere  between 
the  speculators  and  disaster;  to  have  the 
Government  identify  itself  with  com- 
merce, in  fact.  This  the  President  refused 
to  do.  What  he  did  do  was  call  a  special 
session  of  Congress  which  convened  in 
September,  1837,  and  to  which  he  sent  a 
message  which  deserves  to  be  ranked  as 
one  of  the  greatest  state  papers  in  Amer- 
ica. In  that  message  he  proposed  the 
establishment  of  a  sub-treasury  system 
such  as  exists  today.  Congress,  however, 
refused  to  pass  his  sub-treasury  bill.  It 
did  pass  the  Senate  by  a  vote  of  26  to  20, 
but  was  defeated  in  the  House.  His  great 
idea  was  to  receive  recognition  later  on, 

"In  his  message  to  the  extra  session  of 
Congress  President  Van  Buren  pointed 
out  that  the  Government  had  not  caused 
and  could  not  cure  the  profound  commer- 
cial disaster;  that  all  banks  had  stopped 
specie  payments  and  that  therefore  some 
other  custody  of  public  moneys  must  be 
provided;  that  the  Government  could  not 
help  the  people  to  earn  their  living  but 
it  could  refuse  to  aid  the  deception  that 
paper   was   gold   and   the   delusion   that 

values  could  be  created  without  labor.  In 
the  face  of  a  storm  of  abuse  he  took  a  firm 
and  magnificent  stand,  but  his  statesman- 
ship on  that  occasion  did  him  no  good,  but 
rather  harm.  The  country  was  in  distress 
and  looked  to  him  for  aid  which  he  was 
unable  to  give,  and  with  that  unreason 
inseparable  from  a  panic  of  any  kind  he 
was  held  responsible  for  all  trouble  and 
became  the  object  of  unsparing  denuncia- 

Conditions  in  the  country  at  large,  so 
lucidly  and  intelligently  described  in  the 
foregoing  review,  were  supplemented  and 
aggravated  by  the  then  existing  conditions 
in  Indiana.  The  influx  of  population  rep- 
resented a  class  of  people  who  sought  to 
better  themselves  by  utilizing  the  bound- 
less opportunities  here  presented,  espe- 
cially in  agricultural  pursuits.  Fertile 
land  in  abundance  was  to  be  had  for  a 
mere  pittance,  as  compared  with  prices  in 
the  more  extensively  settled  regions  of  the 
East  and  South.  Many  of  those  who  came 
from  the  South  were  hostile  to  slavery. 
Scant  means  did  not  admit  of  acquiring 
plantations  in  States  like  Virginia.  Their 
pride  did  not  permit  them  to  work  among 
slaves.  As  well  stated  by  Logan  Esarey 
in  his  "Internal  Improvements  in  Indi- 
ana" :  "One  can  scarcely  realize  the  con- 
dition of  Indiana  in  1825.  There  was  no 
railroad,  no  canal,  no  pike.  All  her  rivers 
except  the  Ohio  were  obstructed  by  fallen 
trees,  ripples  and  bars.  Two  stage  lines 
led  to  Indianapolis,  one  from  Madison,  the 
other  from  Centerville.  The  service  was 
bad,  roads  frequently  impassable,  and 
stages  usually  late." 

Transportation  was  the  great  problem 
calling  for  solution.  In  the  parlance  of 
the  day,  it  was  the  paramount  issue — the 
momentous  question  aff"ecting  every  in- 
habitant of  the  State.  Wheat  and  corn  in 
abundance  could  be  produced,  but  by  rea- 
son of  inadequate  transportation  facili- 
ties there  was  no  profit  in  raising  grain 
that  cost  three  times  as  much  to  haul  to 
Cincinnati  as  the  farmer  realized  there- 
from in  disposing  of  it  to  the  local  dealer. 




Need  any  one  wonder  that  the  tillers  of 
the  soil  chafed  under  these  conditions  and 
that  they  lent  a  listening  ear  to  every 
scheme  that  gave  any  sort  of  promise  of 

Human  nature  in  those  days  M^as  not 
much  different  from  what  it  is  today.  The 
life  of  a  pioneer  settler  in  Indiana  was  far 
from  an  easy  one.  Hardship  was  in  evi- 
dence wherever  one's  eye  might  be  turned. 
Relief  could  come  from  one  source 
only — ^transportation  facilities.  Immature 
thought  was  the  great  stumbling  block  to 
a  realization  of  this  blessing.  Had  the 
power  of  organized  effort  been  invoked; 
had  patience  been  cultivated  and  im- 
petuosity curbed;  had  feasibility  been 
made  paramount  to  plausibility;  had  wis- 
dom and  practicability  been  insisted  upon 
before  plunging  heedlessly  into  this  or 
that  scheme — in  short,  had  good,  strong, 
common  sense  been  injected  into  the  move- 
ment for  the  inauguration  of  internal  im- 
provements from  the  very  start  and  rigid- 
ly adhered  to  as  the  work  progressed,  a 
mountain-high  debt  would  not  have  been 
piled  up  and  bankruptcy  would  not  have 
discredited  and  dishonored  the  State. 

It  would  be  well  if  every  thoughtful 
citizen  of  the  State  could  be  induced  to 
procure  a  copy  of  Logan  Esarey's  history 
of  "Internal  Improvements  of  Indiana" 
and  give  the  same  studious  perusal.  It  is 
not  a  tiresome  presentation  of  the  subject 
elaborated  and  discussed,  but  a  very  read- 
able and  highly  instructive  contribution  to 
the  historic  literature  of  Indiana.  The 
facts  therein  set  forth  ought  to  be  brought 
.to  the  knowledge  of  every  man  and  woman 
who  cares  to  be  enlightened  with  refer- 
ence to  the  trials  and  tribulations  that 
were  encountered  by  Indiana's  pioneers 
during  the  formative  period,  1826  to  1840. 

The  lesson  which  the  internal  improve- 
ment mania  teaches  is  that  a  too  ready  re- 
sponse to  and  compliance  with  popular 
clamor  more  often  entails  injury  than  it 
confers  benefits.     That  famous,  courage- 

ous and  fearless  journalist,  Horace  Gree- 
ley, once  upon  a  time  declared  that  it  was 
his  purpose  to  give  to  the  readers  of  his 
Neiv  York  Tribime  "not  so  much  what 
they  would  like  to  read  as  what  they  ought 
to  know."  Had  there  been  a  combination 
of  influential,  practical  men  resolved  upon 
first  ascertaining  what  the  State  needed 
and  ought  to  have  been  supplied  with  in 
the  line  of  transportation  facilities,  it  is 
not  improbable  that  a  carefully  worked- 
out  plan  might  have  been  adopted  by  the 
State  and  put  into  practical  use  and  opera- 
tion. Of  course,  the  fact  must  not  be  lost 
sight  of  that  local  jealousies  were  certain 
to  be  encountered.  That  bane  of  society 
is  not  easily  repressed.  Every  locality 
thinks  its  claims  should  be  first  considered 
and  its  wants  first  supplied.  If  politi- 
cians, legislators,  statesmen  and  public 
journals  could  be  brought  to  the  under- 
standing that  the  common  welfare  should 
have  first  consideration,  the  spirit  of 
jealousy  and  envy  might  more  easily  be 
held  in  subjection.  A  striking  illustra- 
tion of  this  truism  was  furnished  in  the 
adjoining  State  of  Illinois  where  that 
superb  statesman,  Stephen  A.  Douglas, 
exerted  a  most  beneficent  influence  by  de- 
vising sundry  safeguards  in  granting 
franchises  to  railroads  and  other  corpora- 
tions. He  foresaw  probabilities  that  came 
to  a  realization  during  his  life-time  and 
that  in  course  of  time  brought  millions 
upon  millions  of  dollars  into  the  State 
treasury,  thus  conferring  a  direct  benefit 
upon  the  taxpayers  of  Illinois  without  im- 
posing any  real  hardships  upon  the  cor- 
porations as  they  developed,  grew  and 
prospered  as  a  result  of  the  steady  in- 
crease of  population  engendered  by  the 
creation  and  operation  of  transportation 
lines  for  the  convenience,  comfort  and  ad- 
vancement of  a  thrifty  people. 

Leadership,  properly,  wisely  and  un- 
selfishly applied,  rarely  fails  to  produce 
results  that  prove  beneficial  and  advan- 
tageous to  the  community,  the  State  or 



the  nation  at  large.  However  vehemently 
leadership  may  be  decried  by  demagogues 
who  delight  in  tickling  the  vanity  of  what 
they  assume  to  constitute  "the  people,"  it 
is  .  an  incontrovertible  truth  that  sound, 
safe,  wise  and  sagacious  leadership  has 
ever  proved  a  benefit  and  a  blessing  to 
communities  that  had  the  good  sense  to 
accept  and  utilize  the  same.  Under  a  rep- 
resentative system  of  government  leader- 
ship is  as  essential  as  is  the  direction  of 
forces  in  the  construction  of  buildings, 
bridges,  highways,  etc.  To  lead,  guide 
and  direct  is  but  another  form  of  expres- 
sion for  bringing  order  out  of  chaos. 
Washington,  Jefferson,  Adams,  Jackson, 
Lincoln,  Douglas,  Tilden,  Thurman  and 
Hendricks  were,  in  their  day  and  genera- 
tion, leaders  of  men,  and  the  people 
profited  by  heeding  their  counsel  and  giv- 
ing emphasis  to  their  views  by  causing 
them  to  be  enacted  into  law. 

In  his  history  of  the  Ohio  Democracy, 
General  Thomas  E.  Powell  expresses  the 
opinion  that 

"It  is  doubtful  if  in  any  American  cam- 
paign any  political  party  has  used  so 
much  buncombe  and  so  little  brains 
as  did  the  Whigs  in  the  presiden- 
tial campaign  of  1840.  Yet  they  won.  On 
the  Whigs'  side  it  was  a  popular  rush  to 
a  circus  where  the  admission  was  free 
and  all  who  attended  could  take  part  in 
the  festive  performance.  Enormous  po- 
litical meetings  were  held  and  these  were 
attended  not  by  men  alone  but  by  entire 
families;  fathers,  mothers,  sons  and 
daughters  all  turned  out.  There  were 
Revolutionary  soldiers  marching  in  pro- 
cession; there  were  bands  of  music  and 
there  were  barrels  of  cider;  there  was 
speech  making  and  festivity,  and  for  a 
sideshow  there  was  a  log  cabin  with  the 
latchstring  hanging  out  and  a  live  coon 
inside.  The  log  cabin  and  the  coon  traveled 
by  wagon  from  place  to  place  and  the  bar- 
rels of  cider  were  supplied  by  the  com- 
munities. The  voice  of  the  spellbinder 
was  heard  in  the  land ;  there  was  so  much 
enthusiasm  that  there  was  no  time  for 
thought.  It  w^as  the  proletariat  running 
loose  in  a  bloodless  raid. 

"Many  causes  have  been  assigned  for 
the  political  revolution  of  1839-40  which 
swept  Democrats  out  of  power  in  the  State 
and  nation  and  placed  the  young  Whig 
party  in  the  ascendency.  Van  Buren's 
espousal  of  an  independent  treaty  would, 
at  the  first  glance,  seem  to  be  the  rock 
upon  which  he  foundered.  This  would 
imply  that  in  1840  the  majority  of  the 
people  of  the  United  States  preferred  the 
national  bank  to  the  sub-treasury  system. 
In  preparing  its  platform  the  Whig  party 
was  very  careful  to  avoid  a  declaration  on 
that  point ;  nevertheless  it  undid  the  work 
done  by  Van  Buren  toward  the  establish- 
ment of  an  independent  treasury  system. 
During  the  campaign  Van  Buren  was  as- 
sailed for  his  sub-treasury  plan  and  no 
doubt  many  imagined  they  could  trace  the 
troubles  of  1837  to  the  destruction  of  the 
United  States  Bank,  and  consequently  en- 
tertained the  belief  that  a  return  to  the 
old  order  of  things  would  be  wise.  Yet 
the  Whigs  as  well  as  the  Democrats  con- 
demned the  'pet  bank'  system.  It  is  there- 
fore improbable  that  his  advocacy  of  the 
sub-treasury  system  was  the  cause  of 
Van  Buren's  defeat.  The  fact  is  he  was 
held  responsible  for  both  the  real  and 
imaginary  errors  of  President  Jackson. 
Also  he  had  been  President  during  a  great 
commercial  crisis  and  the  people,  not  only 
of  that  day  but  of  this,  have  a  strange 
habit  of  laying  all  their  commercial 
troubles  at  the  door  of  the  White  House. 

"  had  been  bad  during  most  of 
Van  Buren's  regime  and  the  general  cry 
was  for  a  change.  Things  might  be  bet- 
ter, they  could  not  well  be  worse,  or  so  the 
people  apparently  thought.  That  the  com- 
mercial troubles  which  occurred  during 
Van  Buren's  administration  and  the  con- 
sequent desire  for  a  change  led  to  the  de- 
feat of  himself  and  his  party  is  made 
absolutely  clear  by  the  speeches  of  Daniel 
Webster  during  that  campaign.  Like  all 
politicians  the  great  Webster  was  afflicted 
with  a  political  bias.  He  must  have  known 
that  Van  Buren's  attitude  during  the  re- 
cent troublous  times  had  been  grand ;  and 
if  he  had  possessed  to  any  degree  the  fore- 
sight with  which  statesmen  are  usually 
credited  or  the  intellect  for  which  he  was 
renowned,  he  must  have  seen  that  the 
sub-treasuiy  system  would  prove  vastly 
superior  to  the  national  bank.  Indeed,  it 
is  to  be  presumed  that  he  did  see  and  un- 

HISTORY      INDIANA     DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

derstand  these  things,  for  in  his  speeches 
he  studiously  avoided  logic  and  regaled 
his  audiences  with  dogmas  and  eloquence. 
Everywhere  he  went  he  cried  out  to  his 
hearers : 

"  'Every  breeze  says  change ;  the  cry, 

the  universal  cry  is  for  change.'  Change 
was  the  keynote  of  his  oratory  and  change 
became  the  watchword  of  his  party 
throughout  that  memorable  election.  It 
was  the  only  argument  they  had,  but  it 

[Chapter  VI.] 



mHE      "Tippecanoe     and     Tyler 
=    too"  campaign  was  both  unique 
and     grotesque.         It     stands 
without     a     parallel     in     the 
'    annals    of    American   politics. 

In  Ohio  and  Indiana  the 
enthusiasm  for  William  Henry 
Harrison  was  doubtless  intensified  by 
the  fact  that  he  was  "one  of  them" — 
both  Ohioan  and  Indianian.  Log  cabins 
were  built  and  exultantly  carried  in  spec- 
tacular processions.  Coon  skins  were  dis- 
played on  poles,  and  barrels  of  hard  cider 
were  dispensed  to  thirsty  ones  at  the  big 
rallies,  political  gatherings,  picnics,  etc.  It 
was  a  great  time  for  the  exuberant  and  the 
emotional.  From  the  very  beginning  of 
the  campaign  it  had  become  apparent  that 
victory  was  in  store  for  the  Whigs.  Mar- 
tin Van  Buren,  the  elegant  and  accom- 
plished New  York  gentleman,  was  at  a 
discount  with  the  sturdy  Westerners,  who 
recognized  in  William  Henry  Harrison  one 
after  their  own  heart.  At  the  November 
election  Van  Buren  carried  but  two  North- 
ern States — Illinois  and  New  Hampshire 
— and  only  five  States  in  the  South.  The 
result  in  Illinois  was  chiefly  due  to  the 
tremendous  efi'ort  put  forth  by  the  idol- 
ized "Little  Giant,"  Stephen  A.  Douglas. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  it  was  more  of  a  tri- 
umph for  Douglas  than  a  victory  for  Van 
Buren.  In  the  Electoral  College  Harrison 
had  234  votes,  Van  Buren  60,  but  the 
popular  vote  shows  no  such  disparity  in 
strength  as  might  be  inferred  from  these 
figures.  On  the  popular  vote  Harrison  had 
1,275,017;  Van  Buren,  1,128,702.  Not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  Van  Buren 
suifered  a  crushing  defeat  in  1840,  his 
vote    in    that    losing  contest  was  350,000 

greater  than  he  polled  four  years  before 
when  he  was  triumphantly  elected  as  the 
successor  of  "Old  Hickory." 

General  Powell  is  quite  correct  in  say- 
ing that  "the  Whig  Party  gained  little,  if 
anything,  by  the  victory  of  1840.  Presi- 
dent Harrison  died  April  4,  1841,  after 
being  President  but  one  month.  By  his 
death  the  Whigs  lost  the  substantial  fruits 
of  their  victory.  The  utterly  incongruous 
elements  that  had  been  held  together  dur- 
ing the  campaign  of  1840  by  discontent 
and  wild,  unthinking  enthusiasm  began 
speedily  to  fall  apart.  Tyler  had  never 
concealed  his  Democratic  views  of  govern- 
ment, and,  as  President,  he  made  no  pre- 
tense of  carrying  out  Whig  doctrines. 
When  Congress  passed  a  bill  to  establish 
a  National  Bank  he  promptly  vetoed  it  and 
in  no  way  exerted  himself  to  promote 
Whig  legislation.  Indeed,  he  allied  him- 
self with  the  Democrats  so  openly  that  he 
did  not  hesitate  to  express  a  desire  for  the 
Democratic  nomination  for  President  in 

OF  1840. 

Activity  in  this  exciting  campaign  be- 
gan early.  On  the  historic  eighth  of  Jan- 
uary the  Democrats  held  a  largely  at- 
tended, enthusiastic  convention.  The  in- 
tensely partisan  semi-weekly  Indiana 
Journal  called  it  the  "Office-holders'  Con- 
vention." Sneeringly  the  charge  was  set 
forth  that  it  was  composed  of  209  office- 
holders, bank  directors,  lawyers,  etc.,  and 
102  of  other  occupations,  being  two-thirds 
officeholders  and  one-third  farmers  and 
mechanics.  Unctious  emphasis  was  given 
by  that  paper  to  the  statement  that  the 




Harrison  convention,  held  on  the  16th  of 
January,  was  composed  of  413  farmers 
and  mechanics,  and  208  officeholders,  bank 
directors,  lawyers,  etc.,  making  it  two- 
thirds  farmers  and  mechanics  and  one- 
third  officeholders — just  the  reverse  of  the 
Van  Buren  convention.  The  nature  of  this 
criticism  serves  as  an  illustration  of  the 
campaign  fodder  which  in  those  days  was 
made  to  do  service  for  the  purpose  of 
warping  the  intellect  of  the  yeomanry. 

The  general  management  of  the  Demo- 
cratic campaign  had  been  largely  intrusted 
to  such  stanch  party  men  as  N.  B.  Palmer, 
Treasurer  of  State;  W.  J.  Brown,  Secre- 
tary of  State,  and  J.  L.  Ketcham,  lawyer. 
As  speakers  the  Democrats  had  on  the 
stump  such  men  as  General  Tilghman  A. 
Howard,  U.  S.  Senator  Edward  Hanne- 
gan,  James  Whitcomb,  Marinus  Willett, 
Finley  Bigger,  Amos  Lane,  Thomas  Smith, 
Robert  Dale  Owen,  John  Law,  Joseph  A. 
Wright,  John  G.  Davis,  Paris  C.  Dunning, 
Delaney  Eckels,  Alvin  P.  Hovey,  Andrew 
Kennedy,  John  Spencer,  Elisha  Long,  Na- 
thaniel West,  General  Drake,  John  Carr, 
William  W.  Wick,  James  Brown  Ray, 
Joseph  Holman  and  Ross  Smiley. 

The  principal  speakers  on  the  Whig  side 
were  Joseph  G.  Marshall,  0.  H.  Smith, 
George  Dunn,  Albert  S.  White,  William 
Herod,  Caleb  Smith,  Richard  W.  Thomp- 
son, Henry  S.  Lane,  Newton  Claypool, 
Samuel  C.  Sample,  John  Liston,  Thomas 
J.  Evans,  Schuyler  Colfax,  John  Vawter, 
Milton  Stapp,  John  Dumont,  Jeremiah 
Sullivan,  Joseph  C.  Eggleston,  William  G. 
Ewing,  James  H.  Cravens,  Jonathan  Mc- 
Carty,  John  Ewing,  George  H.  Dunn, 
Samuel  Judah,  Randall  Crawford,  Thomas 
H.  Blake,  Elisha  Huntington,  Judge  De 
Bruler,  Charles  Dewey  and  Conrad  Baker. 

In  both  these  lists  will  be  found  the 
names  of  a  number  of  gentlemen  who  later 
on  became  quite  conspicuous  in  the  coun- 
cils of  the  State  and  nation.  Cabinet  offi- 
cers, U.  S.  Senators,  Governors,  Con- 
gressmen and  other  distinguished  officials 

will  be  found  liberally  represented  among 
those  who  made  the  welkin  ring  during 
that  memorable  campaign. 

As  stated  by  Historian  Smith,  "For 
near  six  weeks  these  men  went  up  and 
down  the  State.  Joint  debates  were  the 
order  of  the  day.  Barbecues,  torchlight 
parades  and  rallies  varied  the  program. 
It  is  estimated  that  forty  thousand  people 
gathered  at  one  time  on  the  Tippecanoe 
battleground.  The  campaign  closed  with 
a  monster  parade  in  Indianapolis  the 
night  before  the  election.  Mr.  Whitcomb 
was  to  speak  on  the  North  Side  and  Sena- 
tor 0.  H.  Smith  on  the  South  Side.  After 
waiting  till  midnight  for  the  noise  to  sub- 
side, the  two  speakers  left  the  stands." 

Throughout  the  campaign  much  viru- 
lence was  injected  into  the  discussions. 
Even  a  gentleman  so  amiable  and  courte- 
ous as  Senator  William  Hendricks  did  not 
escape  ill-natured  attack.  Because  of  his 
conciliatory  course  during  the  heated 
United  States  Bank  controversy  he  was 
spoken  of  as  "being  on  all  sides  and  never 

At  the  August  election  for  choosing  a 
Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor,  the 
only  State  officers  elected  by  the  people 
under  the  old  constitution,  Samuel  Bigger 
received  62,678  votes  and  Tilghman  A. 
Howard,  54,083.  The  vote  for  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor stood :  Samuel  Hall,  Whig, 
62,612;  S.  S.  Tuley,  Democrat,  53,388. 

At  the  presidential  election  in  Novem- 
ber the  vote  of  Indiana  stood:  William 
Henry  Harrison,  Whig,  65,302;  Martin 
Van  Buren,  Democrat,  51,695;  Harrison's 
majority,  13,607. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  total  vote 
for  Governor  was  116,761,  while  the  total 
vote  for  President  reached  116,997.  .Yet 
Harrison's  majority  exceeded  that  of  Big- 
ger, 5,012.  So,  after  all,  the  result  in  In- 
diana could  hardly  be  properly  called  a 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

The  Harrison  electors  for  Indiana  were : 
Jonathan  McCarty,  James  H.  Cravens, 

Joseph  G.  Marshall,  Caleb  B.  Smith, 

John  W.  Payne,  William  Herod, 

Joseph  L.  White,  Samuel  C.  Sample. 

Richard  W.  Thompson, 

The  unsuccessful  candidates  for  Van 
Buren  electors  were: 

William  Hendricks,  John  L.  Robinson, 

Geo.  W.  Ewing,  Andrew  Kennedy, 

Robert  Dale  Owen,  W.  J.  Peaslee, 

Geo.  Bowen,  J.  M.  Lemon. 

Thomas  J.  Henley, 

David  Turpie,  a  student  of  tender  years 
at  that  time,  attended  the  Tippecanoe 
barbecue.  He  says  it  was  an  immense  af- 
fair. It  lasted  three  days.  He  places  the 
number  of  persons  participating  at 
20,000,  just  half  of  Smith's  estimate. 
However,  a  difference  in  estimates  of 
crowds  is  not  usually  taken  seriously  from 
either  a  mathematical  or  ethical  point  of 

Judge  Turpie  speaks  thus  of  the  great 
meeting:  "Several  stands  were  erected 
for  speaking,  printed  bills  gave  the  names 
of  the  speakers  and  announced  the  hour 
of  meeting,  and  many  bands  of  music 
played  during  the  intervals.  Eminent 
statesmen  of  the  Whig  party  from  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  country  spoke  on  this 
occasion,  but  the  star  speaker  and  guest 
was  Mr.  James  Brooks  of  the  city  of  New 
York.  Mr.  Brooks  was  the  editor  of  the 
New  York  Evening  Express,  at  that  time 
the  leading  Whig  newspaper  in  the  East. 
He  had  been  long  a  friend  and  admirer  of 
Mr.  Clay  and  had  earnestly  supported 
his  candidacy  for  the  Presidency;  his 
presence  at  this  great  assemblage  was  un- 
derstood to  signify  that  the  distinguished 
Kentuckian  would  give  his  aid  to  the  cause 
of  General  Harrison." 

It  may  be  stated  in  this  connection  that 
both  Henry  Clay  and  Daniel  Webster 
considered  themselves  more  entitled  to 
the  Presidential  nomination  in  1840  than 
William  Henry  Harrison.  Both  felt  that 
1840   was   the   psychological   moment   to 

vitalize  a  Whig  nomination  into  a  Presi- 
dential i-eality.  Fate  had  decreed  other- 
wise, as  in  many  other  cases.  In  po- 
litical life  there  are  indeed  many  disap- 


In  a  neatly  gotten  up  booklet  entitled 
"The  Rooster,"  issued  by  John  F.  Mitchell 
of  the  Hancock  Democrat,  is  given  a  some- 
what amusing  account  of  a  visit  made  to 
Indiana  by  former  President  Martin  Van 
Buren.  As  related  by  Mr.  Mitchell,  the 
ex-President  made  a  tour  of  the  West,  in 
1843,  following  the  route  of  the  National 
or  Cumberland  road,  which  is  the  main 
thoroughfare  in  Greenfield.  His  visit  to 
Greenfield  was  a  great  occasion  and  the 
Democrats  made  extensive  preparations 
for  his  entertainment.  The  journey  from 
the  East  was  made  by  stage,  and  almost 
all  of  the  stage  drivers  were  Whigs. 

During  President  Van  Buren's  ad- 
ministration he  had  vetoed  a  bill  for  an 
appropriation  for  the  improvement  of 
the  National  road.  The  West  was  great- 
ly displeased  at  this  action,  for  the  road 
in  many  places  was  almost  impassable. 
The  stage  drivers  had  planned  to  give  the 
ex-President  an  opportunity  to  count  the 
mud  holes  along  the  road.  Near  Green- 
field there  was  a  steep  hill  and,  at  a  signal, 
the  driver  pulled  his  horses  to  the  side 
and  the  famous  traveler  was  thrown  into 
the  mud.  When  Mr.  Van  Buren  arrived 
in  Greenfield  he  was  in  a  deplorable  con- 
dition and  new  clothes  had  to  be  pro- 

Later  in  the  day  a  public  reception  was 
held  in  the  front  room  of  the  Chapman 
tavern.  Mr.  Joseph  Chapman  took  great 
pleasure  in  introducing  his  young  son, 
Martin  Van  Buren  Chapman,  to  the  ex- 
President.  This  same  Martin  Van  Buren 
Chapman  later  became  a  teacher  in  the 
Greenfield  Academy  and  is  responsible 
for  a  large  portion  of  the  early  training 

HISTORY     INDIANA     DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

of  Indiana's  favorite  poet,  Mr.  James 
Whitcomb  Riley,  who  was  his  pupil. 

In  the  same  booklet  is  given  an  ex- 
tended account  of  the  origin  of  the  famous 
shibboleth,  "Crow,  Chapman,  crow!" 
There  lived  in  those  days  in  Hancock 
county  an  ardent  Democrat  named  Joseph 
Chapman.  Political  discussions,  then 
quite  frequent  and  spirited,  were  freely 
participated  in  by  this  champion  of  De- 
mocracy. He  served  as  a  member  of  the 
Legislature  and  was  highly  respected. 
During  the  campaign  of  1840  quite  a 
number  of  Democrats  declared  themselves 
for  Harrison.  Reports  of  this  disaffec- 
tion reached  the  city  of  Indianapolis  and 
prompted  the  Democratic  postmaster  of 
that  town  to  write  a  letter  of  encourage- 
ment to  Mr.  Chapman.  In  this  letter  its 
recipient  was  laconically  urged  to  "Crow, 
Chapman,  crow!" — that  is  to  say,  in  the 
vernacular  of  the  day,  to  keep  a  stiif 
upper  lip,  or  to  present  a  bold  front.  This 
letter,  it  seems,  was  stolen  and  published 
by  some  unscrupulous  Whig.  By  reason 
of  the  reference  to  numerous  alleged  ac- 
cessions to  the  camp  of  the  Harrisonites, 
much  ado  was  made  over  the  affair — much 
more  than  its  importance  seems  to  have 
merited.  The  commonly  accepted  ver- 
sion was  that  Mr.  Chapman  had  acquired 
quite  a  reputation  as  an  imitator  of  a 
rooster  crowing.  This  was  afterward 
denied  as  wholly  unfounded.  However, 
out  of  the  story  grew  the  propensity  for 
identifying  the  rooster  with  Democratic 
exultation.  For  a  long  time  "Crow,  Chap- 
man, crow!"  served  excellently  in  the 
columns  of  Democratic  publications  to 
herald  something  of  a  cheering  character 
politically.  At  any  rate,  in  due  time  the 
rooster  became  the  Democratic  emblem 
in  Indiana,  and  is  still  so. 

In  the  days  of  Jackson  the  Democratic 
emblem  was  a  hickory  pole  and  broom. 
In  after  years  a  live  or  stuffed  rooster  was 
considered  quite  the  thing  in  Democratic 
processions.     Both  emblems  answered  a 

purpose  and  afforded  much  delight  to 
those  who  are  fond  of  injecting  something 
spectacular  into  a  political  campaign. 



GOVERNOR  IN   1843. 

It  did  not  take  long  for  a  political  re- 
action to  set  in  after  the  landslide  of  1840, 
and  after  the  death  of  President  Harri- 
son and  the  not  wholly  unexpected  defec- 
tion of  the  Virginian  who  advanced  from 
the  second  to  the  first  place  in  the  new  ad- 
ministration. The  nomination  by  the 
Whigs  of  John  Tyler  to  the  Vice-Presi- 
dency and  his  subsequent  election  in  No- 
vember was  an  expediency  procedure, 
prompted  by  a  desire  to  bring  to  the  Whig 
standard  the  various  elements  of  opposi- 
tion to  the  Van  Buren  administration. 
Tyler  was  something  of  a  free  lance  in 
politics,  though  for  years  closely  allied 
with  Henry  Clay.  Political  shifts  were 
easily  made  in  those  days,  and  Tyler  did 
not  regard  himself  inseparably  tied  to 
the  party  that  had  elevated  him  to  the 
second  highest  office  in  the  gift  of  the  Na- 
tion. He  considered  himself  privileged  to 
follow  his  personal  views  and  convictions 
rather  than  being  obliged  to  adjust  him- 
self to  the  program  mapped  out  by  the 
party  leaders  who  had  deemed  it  "good 
politics"  to  place  him  on  their  ticket  and 
to  clothe  him  with  the  habiliments  of  high 
office.  When  his  determination  to  pursue 
this  course  became  generally  known  the 
usual  cry  of  "traitor"  was  raised  in 
chagrined  and  distressed  Whig  circles 
throughout  the  land.  Maledictions  were 
hurled  at  him  right  and  left.  Crimina- 
tion and  recrimination  followed  in  pro- 
fusion. The  more  vehement  the  accusa- 
tions the  wider  the  breach.  Reconcilia- 
tion had  been  rendered  impossible. 
Estrangement  had  become  so  complete  as 
to  have  been  rendered  irreparable. 
Toward  the  last  year  of  the  Tyler  ad- 
ministration   flirtation    with    Democratic 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

leaders  had  been  so  marked  as  to  justify 
the  conclusion  that  it  amounted  to  an  in- 
vitation to  tender  John  Tyler  the  Demo- 
cratic nomination  for  the  Presidency  in 
1844.  Needless  to  add  that  the  hint  was 
not  taken.  When  the  convention  met  at 
Baltimore  to  nominate  a  Presidential 
ticket  a  large  number  of  Federal  office- 
holders were  on  hand  to  urge  his  nomina- 
tion. Receiving  no  encouragement,  they 
held  a  sort  of  rump  convention  of  their 
own  and  formally  nominated  Tyler  for 
the  Presidency  without  naming  a  running 
mate.  The  performance  was  too  gro- 
tesque to  be  seriously  regarded,  so  some 
weeks  after  this  nominee  issued  a  ran- 
corous letter  formally  taking  himself  out 
of  the  running. 

At  the  State  election  in  1842  the  lead- 
ing question  before  the  people  of  Indiana 
was  who  should  be  chosen  by  the  Legisla- 
ture to  represent  this  commonwealth  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  The 
Democratic  favorite  for  this  position  was 
General  Tilghman  A.  Howard,  who  two 
years  before  had  met  with  defeat  in  his 
race  for  the  Governorship.  The  choice 
of  the  Whigs  was  Senator  Oliver  H. 
Smith,  who  aspired  to  re-election.  The 
race  was  an  exceedingly  close  one,  as  al- 
ready set  forth  in  a  preceding  chapter, 
and  resulted  in  the  entrance  of  a  "dark 
horse"  in  the  person  of  Edward  A.  Han- 
negan  and  his  election  upon  the  with- 
drawal of  General  Howard,  who  had 
come  within  two  votes  of  the  coveted 
prize,  but  who  had  become  convinced  that 
the  cards  were  staked  against  him  on  ac- 
count of  his  refusal  to  promise  certain 
offices  to  several  mercenary  members  of 
the  Legislature. 

Mr.  Hannegan  was  a  remarkably  bril- 
liant man,  somewhat  erratic,  but  able, 
courageous,  yea,  fearless.  His  habits 
were  decidedly  convivial.  He  was  a  native 
of  Ohio;  attended  the  public  schools; 
studied  law ;  was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and 
began  practice  in  Covington,  Ind. ;  served 

several  terms  in  the  Legislature;  was 
elected  as  a  Democrat  to  the  23rd  and  24th 
Congresses  (March  4,  1833,  to  March  4, 
1837)  ;  defeated  for  re-election,  but  in 
1842  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate 
for  a  full  term  of  six  years.  Toward  the 
close  of  the  Polk  administration  he  was 
appointed  Minister  to  Prussia,  serving 
from  March  22,  1849,  to  January  13, 
1850,  when  he  was  recalled  on  account  of 
his  temperamental  incompatibility  with 
diplomatic  discreetness  and  disregard  of 
diplomatic  usages.  Upon  his  return  to 
Indiana  he  became  involved  in  some  seri- 
ous imbroglios  that  impelled  him  to  move 
to  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  where  he  died,  Febru- 
ary 25,  1859.  Intemperance  marred  an 
otherwise  brilliant  career.  It  proved  to 
be  an  unconquerable  foe. 

The  plight  into  which  the  State  had  been 
brought  by  the  several  Whig  administra- 
tions in  inaugurating  a  stupendously  im- 
practicable, ill-considered  and  enormous- 
ly expensive  internal  improvement  scheme 
admonished  the  Democrats  of  Indiana  to 
cast  about,  in  1843,  for  a  man  for  Gov- 
ernor whose  ability  and  integrity  gave 
promise  of  bringing  order  out  of  chaos, 
restoring  the  commonwealth's  shattered 
credit  and  affording  relief  to  the  sorely 
burdened  taxpayers.  They  had  selected 
such  a  man  three  years  before,  but  the 
coon  skin,  log  cabin  and  hard  cider  phan- 
tasy blinded  the  people  to  their  real  inter- 
ests and  impelled  them  to  defeat  Tilgh- 
man A.  Howard.  The  Indiana  Democracy 
had  within  their  ranks  another  man  of 
equal  sterling  qualities  and  high  attain- 
ments who  could  be  depended  on,  in  case 
of  his  election,  to  bring  about  a  more 
satisfactory  and  assuring  condition  of 
affairs.  The  man  believed  to  be  equal  to 
the  emergency  was  James  Whitcomb — 
upright  citizen,  rigid  economist,  talented 
lawyer,  wise  legislator,  and  patriotic  states- 
man. His  nomination  at  once  met  with 
hearty  approval  and  with  final  ratification 
at  the  polls. 




Mr.  Whitcomb  was  a  native  of  Ver- 
mont, but  was  reared  on  a  farm  near  Cin- 
cinnati. As  a  lad  he  displayed  an  extraor- 
dinary fondness  for  the  study  of  liter- 
ature and  the  acquirement  of  knowledge. 
So  persevering  was  he  in  his  studies  that 
he  soon  fitted  himself  for  college.  In  due 
time  he  graduated  from  Transylvania 
University.  Having  qualified  himself  for 
the  law,  he  was,  in  March,  1822,  admitted 
to  the  Fayette  county  bar  in  Kentucky. 
Two  years  later  he  located  in  Blooming- 
ton,  Ind.,  and  soon  won  his  way  to  a  lu- 
crative practice.  In  1826  he  was,  by  Gov- 
ernor James  Brown  Ray,  appointed  Prose- 
cuting Attorney  of  his  circuit.  Recogni- 
tion of  his  ability  led  to  his  election  to  the 
State  Senate  in  1830,  and  to  his  re-election 
three  years  later.  He  took  a  conspicuous 
part  in  the  attempt  to  safeguard  the  State 
against  the  internal  improvement  mania, 
but  found  himself  unable  to  stem  the  tide. 
In  1836  President  Jackson  appointed  him 
Commissioner  of  the  General  Land  Office, 
which  position  he  filled  ably  and  accept- 
ably to  the  end  of  the  Van  Buren  adminis- 
tration. Early  in  1841  Mr.  Whitcomb  re- 
turned to  Indiana,  locating  in  Terre 
Haute,  where  he  soon  commanded  a  large 
and  lucrative  practice. 

His  campaign  for  the  Governorship  was 
masterly  and  productive  of  splendid  re- 
sults. His  competitor  was  Governor  Sam- 
uel Bigger,  who  three  years  before  was 
triumphantly  elected  to  that  office.  Whit- 
comb defeated  Bigger  by  2,069  votes. 
Jesse  D.  Bright  was  the  Democratic  nom- 
inee for  Lieutenant-Governor  and  elected 
by  a  plurality  of  4,301. 

The  total  vote  for  Governor  at  the  1843 
election  was  121,135.  Of  these  James 
Whitcomb  had  60,787,  Samuel  Bigger 
58,718,  Elizur  Deming  1,630. 

For  Lieutenant-Governor,  Jesse  D. 
Bright  had  60,982,  John  H.  Bradley 
56,681,  Stephen  S.  Harding  1,687. 

There  is  but  little  doubt  that  the  Meth- 
odist church  of  Indiana  contributed  large- 

ly to  the  defeat  of  Governor  Bigger  and 
the  election  of  Mr.  Whitcomb.  The  latter 
was  for  years  a  Methodist  class-leader  and 
stood  deservedly  high  in  the  church. 
During  the  campaign  the  charge  was  made 
that  in  opposing  some  legislation  which 
resulted  in  the  establishment  of  Asbury 
University  (now  DePauw),  Governor 
Bigger  had  said  the  Methodist  church  did 
not  need  an  educated  clergy;  that  an 
ignorant  one  was  better  suited  to  the  ca- 
pacity of  its  membership.  Bishop 
Ames,  referring  to  this  episode,  said  in 
1846:  "It  was  the  Amen  corner  of  the 
Methodist  church  that  defeated  Governor 
Bigger,  and  I  had  a  hand  in  the  work." 
Bigger  was  for  years  a  ruling  elder  in  the 
Presbyterian  church.  He  was  an  accom- 
plished musician  and  an  artist  in  handling 
the  violin.     So  was  Governor  Whitcomb. 

So  acceptable  was  the  first  administra- 
tion of  Governor  Whitcomb  that  he  was 
honored  with  a  triumphant  re-election  in 
1846,  defeating  his  Whig  competitor,  Jo- 
seph G.  Marshall,  by  a  majority  of  3,958. 
And  Marshall  was  one  of  the  strongest  and 
most  popular  men  in  the  State.  Paris  C. 
Dunning,  a  most  estimable  and  excellent 
man,  was  Wh'tcomb's  running  mate  in 
this  contest  and  triumphantly  elected. 

In  its  issue  of  January  13,  1846,  the 
Indimiapolis  Sentinel  gave  the  Whitcomb- 
Dunning  ticket  this  ringing  endorsement : 

"The  State  conventions  of  two  great 
parties  have  both  been  held  and  candi- 
dates for  the  two  principal  executive 
offices  have  been  nominated.  If  we  may 
anticipate  the  end  of  the  beginning,  we 
may  be  sure  of  an  easy  victory.  The  Dem- 
ocratic convention  was  one  of  the  most 
enthusiastic,  the  Whig  convention  the 
most  depressed,  that  it  has  been  our  good 
fortune  to  behold.  Whitcomb  was  nom- 
inated for  re-election  by  acclamation  with- 
out a  single  dissenting  voice.  The  Whigs, 
full  of  doubt  and  fears,  finally  agreed  to 
Mr.  Marshall,  because  such  men  as  0.  H. 
Smith  and  ex-Governor  Bigger  would  not 
submit  to  the  odium  which  the  certain  de- 
feat of  the  Whig  party    would    have    in- 


19  16 

flicted  upon  them.  For  it  is  the  custom 
with  the  Whig  party  always  to  attribute 
their  reverses  to  the  unpopularity  or  un- 
fitness of  their  candidates.  We  well  recol- 
lect the  sneering  cut  which  the  Journal 
gave  these  leaders  of  its  party  for  their 
refusal,  imputing  it  due  to  selfishness  and 
cowardice.  But  we  think  they  only  gave 
evidence  of  superior  wisdom  in  thus  re- 
fusing to  be  sacrificed. 

"The  coming  contest  we  think  will  be  a 
cool  one.  The  people  will  calmly  investi- 
gate the  course  of  Governor  Whitcomb's 
administration  and  decide  accordingly. 
It  is  in  view  of  this  investigation  and  de- 
cision that  we  make  the  positive  predic- 
tion of  success  to  our  party  in  August. 
We  know  that  Governor  Whitcomb  has 
administered  our  affairs  as  prudently, 
honestly  and  successfully  as  perhaps  any 
other  man  in  the  country  could  have  done. 
In  the  face  of  the  greatest  obstacles  he 
has  done  much  good,  and,  so  far  as  we 
have  knowledge,  no  harm.  This  is  saying 
a  great  deal,  if  the  weight  which  we  in- 
tend them  to  imply  is  given  to  our  words. 
The  people  never  did  desert  a  faithful 
servant  and  will  not  now. 

"Paris  C.  Dunning,  of  Monroe  county, 
who  was  nominated  as  the  Democratic 
candidate  for  Lieutenant-Governor,  is  a 
gentleman  of  much  talent  and  energy  of 
character.  He  did  good  service  as  a  Polk 
elector  during  the  last  canvass.  He  is  far 
the  superior  of  Mr.  Orth,  the  young  gen- 
tleman nominated  by  the  Whigs  for  the 
same  office.  Mr.  Dunning  will  make  him- 
self known  to  the  people  before  the  Au- 
gust election." 

The  Sentinel  had  evidently  read  the 
signs  of  the  times  correctly.  Its  predic- 
tion that  Whitcomb  and  Dunning  would 
surely  be  triumphantly  elected  was  veri- 
fied to  the  very  letter  by  the  majesty  of 
the  ballot. 

Quoting  the  language  of  W.  W.  Woollen : 
"Governor  Whitcomb  filled  the  execu- 
tive chair  during  an  eventful  period  of 
the  State's  history.  He  entered  the  office 
with  the  State  loaded  down  with  debt, 
upon  which  no  interest  had  been  paid  for 
years;  he  left  it  with  the  debt  adjusted 
and  the  State's  credit  restored.  'He 
smote  the  rock  of  national  resources,  and 
abundant  streams  of  revenue  burst  forth ; 

he  touched  the  dead  corpse  of  public 
credit,  and  it  sprang  upon  its  feet.'  It 
was  at  his  suggestion  and  on  his  recom- 
mendation that  the  Butler  bill  was  passed, 
whereby  one-half  the  State's  debt  was 
paid  by  a  transfer  of  the  Wabash  and  Erie 
canal,  and  the  other  half  arranged  for  by 
the  issuance  of  bonds  drawing  a  low  rate 
of  interest.  The  settlement  was  alike 
satisfactory  to  the  bondholders  and  the 
people,  and  in  Governor  Whitcomb's  own 
words,  restored  'the  tarni.shed  escutcheon 
of  Indiana  to  its  original  brightness.' 
Had  he  done  nothing  else,  he  would  de- 
serve the  gratitude  of  all,  but  this  was 
only  one  of  the  many  things  he  did  for  the 
good  of  the  people  and  the  honor  of  the 
State.  It  was  by  his  efforts  that  a  public 
sentiment  was  created  which  demanded 
the  establishment  of  our  benevolent  and 
reformatory  institutions,  and  he  it  was 
who  awakened  the  people  of  Indiana  to 
the  importance  of  establishing  common 
schools  and  providing  a  fund  for  their 
maintenance.  It  was  while  he  was  Gov- 
ernor that  the  Mexican  war  broke  out,  and 
Indiana  was  called  upon  for  soldiers  to  a.s- 
sist  in  'conquering  a  peace.'  Five  regi- 
ments of  infantrv  were  organized  and 
mustered  into  the  service  under  his  di- 
rection, and  the  ease  and  rapidity  with 
which  it  was  done  proved  him  as  able  in 
organization  as  in  finance. 

"The  Legislature  of  1849  elected  Gov- 
ernor Whitcomb  to  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  for  the  term  commencing 
in  March  of  that  year.  He  was  qualified 
by  talent,  by  education  and  by  experience 
for  the  place,  and  he  would  have  added 
luster  to  a  name  already  great  by  his  serv- 
ice there  had  his  health  been  good  and  he 
permitted  to  serve  out  his  term.  But  dis- 
ease had  fastened  itself  upon  him,  and 
therefore  he  was  unable  to  discharge  his 
Senatorial  duties  as  he  otherwise  would 
have  done.  He  often  left  the  capital  in 
quest  of  health,  but  he  found  it  not.  His 
disease  (gravel)  was  painful  in  the  ex- 
treme, but  he  bore  it  with  Christian  forti- 
tude. He  died  at  New  York,  October  4, 
1852,  away  from  the  State  whose  repre- 
sentative he  was.  His  remains  were  con- 
veyed to  Indianapolis  and  buried  in  Green- 
lawn  Cemetery,  where  they  have  mould- 
ered to  dust.  The  State  erected  a  monu- 
ment to  his  memory,  and  it  still  stands  to 
point  out  the  spot  where  lies  all  that  is 



1  6 

mortal  of  one  whose  influence  upon  public 
sentiment  is  felt  even  at  the  present  day." 

Shortly  before  James  Whitcomb  was 
nominated  for  Governor  he  had  written  a 
pamphlet  in  opposition  to  the  high  pro- 
tective tariff  idea.  Upon  the  publication 
and  circulation  thereof  encomiums  were 
fairly  showered  on  its  author.  It  was 
pronounced  the  ablest  argument  on  the 
subject  discussed  that  had  yet  been  put 
into  print.  It  was  widely  circulated.  In 
1882  the  Indianapolis  Sentinel,  by  special 
request,  reprinted  the  document,  accom- 
panying it  with  profuse  yet  merited  lauda- 

That  there  has  been  no  overstatement  in 
any  of  the  tributes  to  this  remarkable  man 
will  be  made  apparent  by  the  reproduction 
of  an  extract  from  one  of  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks'  eloquent  addresses,  delivered 
in  April,  1882,  at  Indianapolis : 

"Governor  Whitcomb  was  a  great 
scholar.  He  was  capable  not  only  of 
acquiring  but  of  using  the  accumulations 
of  learning.  With  him  learning  became 
an  influence,  an  instrumentality,  a  power. 
His  tastes  were  cultivated.  He  com- 
manded beautiful  and  strong  language, 
and  in  it  he  clothed  his  thoughts,  that 
were  always  appropriate  to  the  subject 
and  the  occasion.  I  heard  him  address 
the  people  in  his  first  candidacy  for  Gov- 
ernor. It  was  the  greatest  political  speech 
I  have  ever  heard.  There  was  not  in  it  a 
vulgarism  or  an  appeal  to  low  sentiment. 
He  addressed  reason,  emotion,  sympathy. 
The  multitude  stood  enraptured.  As  men 
went  from  the  place  of  meeting  they  fell 
into  grave  and  serious  conversation  about 

what  they  had  heard,  and  the  impression 
remained.  From  that  day  he  was  a  lead- 
er, but  not  as  men  commonly  speak  of 
leadership;  he  maneuvered  for  no  combi- 
nations ;  he  was  a  leader  in  a  higher  sense. 
He  declared  what  he  believed  to  be  the 
truth  and  trusted  to  its  influence  upon 
men's  minds  to  bring  them  into  common 
action.  He  led  legislators  because  it  was 
safest  for  them  to  follow.  His  manner 
was  grave  and  serious,  his  voice  was  full 
and  musical  and  his  delivery  almost  with- 
out gesture.  I  never  heard  him  in  court, 
but  am  sure  he  was  a  formidable  antago- 
nist before  either  court  or  jury." 

Mr.  Woollen  is  authority  for  the  state- 
ment that  "Governor  Whitcomb  was  an 
active  Freemason.  He  was  the  first  man 
knighted  in  Indiana,  the  honor  being  con- 
ferred upon  him  May  20,  1848.  Raper 
Commandery  was  organized  in  his  house, 
and  for  some  time  held  its  meetings  there. 
He  was  proud  of  his  connections  with 
Masonry;  in  his  aflFections  Masonry  stood 
only  second  to  his  church." 

During  the  third  year  of  his  occupancy 
of    the    gubernatorial    chair,    March    24, 

1846,  Mr.  Whitcomb  was  married  to  Mrs. 
Martha  Ann  Hurst.      She   died   July    17, 

1847,  shortly  after  giving  birth  to  a 
daughter,  who  in  later  years  became  the 
wife  of  Claude  Matthews,  Secretary  of 
State  from  1891  to  1893,  and  Governor  of 
Indiana  from  1893  to  1897.  Governor 
Whitcomb  recorded  his  adored  wife's 
death  in  the  family  Bible,  following  the 
record  with  these  much-meaning  words: 
"How  brief  our  happy  sojourn  together." 

[Chapter  VII.] 



HE  victory  won  in   1843  under 

'  I  ^  ly  the  leadership  of  Whitcomb  and 
I  I  Dunning  had  an  inspiring  effect 
X  ill  on  the  Indiana  Democracy.  It 
awakened  confidence  in  their 
ability  to  carry  the  State  for 
Polk  and  Dallas  at  the  Novem- 
ber election,  and  to  aid  to  the  extent  of 
twelve  electoral  votes  in  again  placing  the 
country  under  Democratic  control.  As- 
sembling in  convention  at  Indianapolis  in 
the  month  of  June,  they  selected  an  elec- 
toral ticket  composed  of  some  of  the  best 
and  most  prominent  Democrats  in  the 
State.  For  electors  at  large  they  those  Dr. 
Graham  N.  Fitch,  of  Logansport,  and 
James  G.  Read,  of  Jeffersonville.  For  Dis- 
trict Electors  they  named: 


1.  William  A.  Bowles,  Orange  county. 

2.  Elijah  Newland,  Washington. 

3.  John  M.  Johnson,  Franklin. 

4.  Samuel  E.  Perkins,  Wayne. 

5.  William  W.  Wick,  Marion. 

6.  Paris  C.  Dunning,  Monroe. 

7.  Austin  M.  Puett,  Parke. 

8.  Henry  W.  Ellsworth,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  Charles  W.  Cathcart,  Laporte. 
10.  Lucien  P.  Ferry,  Allen. 


Livingston   Dunlap, 
Horatio  J.  Harris, 
J.  P.  Chapman, 
A.  F.  Morrison, 
Thomas  Johnson, 
Elias  N.  Skinner, 
Samuel  P.  Daniels, 
Abram  Koontz, 

James  P.  Drake, 
Nathan  B.  Palmei 
Charles  Parry, 
Capt.  John  Cain, 
E.  Hedderly, 
Nathaniel  West, 
Julius  Nocolai. 

A  ringing  declaration  of  "Democratic 
Principles  and  Measures"  was  promul- 
gated in  this  form: 

A  simple  and  frugal  Government  con- 
fined within  strict  constitutional  limits. 

A  strict  construction  of  the  Constitu- 
tion and  no  assumption  of  doubtful  pow- 

No  national  bank  to  swindle  the  labor- 
ing population. 

No  connection  between  the  Government 
and  banks. 

A  diplomacy  asking  for  nothing  but 
what  is  clearly  right  and  submitting  to 
nothing  wrong. 

No  public  debt  either  by  the  general 
Government  or  by  the  States,  except  for 
objects  of  urgent  necessity. 

No  assumption  by  the  general  Govern- 
ment of  the  debts  of  the  States,  either  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  by  the  distribution  of 
the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands. 

A  revenue  tariff  discriminating  in  favor 
of  the  poor  consumer  instead  of  the  rich 

No  extensive  system  of  internal  im- 
provement by  the  general  Government  or 
by  the  States. 

A  Constitutional  barrier  against  im- 
provident State  loans. 

The  honest  payment  of  our  debts  and 
the  sacred  preservation  of  the  public 

A  gradual  return  from  the  paper  credit 

No  grants  of  exclusive  charters  and 
privileges  by  special  legislation  to  banks. 

No  connection  between  church  and 

No  proscription  for  honest  opinions. 

Fostering  aid  to  public  education. 

A  "progressive"  reformation  of  all 

In  Indiana,  as  in  other  States,  the  cam- 
paign of  1844  became  one  of  intense  bit- 
terness. A  good  deal  of  personal  abuse 
was  injected  into  it.  The  apostacy  of 
Tyler  had  greatly  embittered  the  Whigs. 
Even  the  death  of  President  Harrison, 
officially  declared  to  have  been  due  to  an 
attack  of  bilious  pleurisy,  but  by  others 
asserted  to  have  been  brought  about  by  ex- 


19  1 

haustive  worry  over  the  intense  pressure 
for  recognition  by  importunate  office- 
seekers,  constituted  no  insignificant  part 
of  the  campaign.  Democrats,  though 
tacitly  approving  the  attitude  of  Tyler  on 
the  "burning  issues"  of  the  day,  did  not 
deem  it  incumbent  on  themselves  to 
champion  or  applaud  the  course  of  that 
public  functionary.  When  the  Whigs,  in 
their  rage,  denounced  Tyler  as  "the  cor- 
rupt, foresworn,  perfidious,  mocking 
image  of  executive  rule  at  Washington," 
Democrats  were  content  with  the  re- 
joinder that  Tyler  was  placed  in  power  by 
the  Whigs  and  that  the  Democrats  were 
in  no  sense  responsible  for  his  official 
creation.  This  was  considered  a  "knock- 
down argument"  that  afforded  no  comfort 
to  the  Whigs.  A  new  political  epithet  was 
introduced.  It  had  originated  in  New 
York,  where  a  factional  Democratic  meet- 
ing terminated  in  a  row  and  a  rumpus  be- 
tween "Equal  Rights  men"  and  the 
"Hunkers."  During  the  fracas  the  gas 
was  turned  out  by  connivance.  The  Equal 
Rights  men  were  so  determined  to  con- 
tinue the  meeting  that  they  lit  what  were 
then  called  loco  foco  matches  and  con- 
tinued the  proceedings  with  that  sort  of 
scant  illumination.  The  novelty  of  the 
thing  was  so  engaging  that  it  received 
widespread  publicity,  and  in  due  course 
of  time  the  term  Loco  Foco  was  applied  to 
Democrats  in  general.  As  a  political 
nickname  it  did  service  up  to  1858.  It 
was  no  longer  heard  of  after  that. 

The  Democratic  speakers  in  Indiana 
made  eff'ective  use  of  both  State  and  na- 
tional issues.  They  presented  strong 
arguments.  Responsive  audiences  in- 
spired the  campaign  managers  with  high 
confidence  in  the  outcome.  And  they  were 
not  disappointed.  A  count  of  the  votes 
cast  at  the  November  election  showed  this 
result : 

James  K.  Polk,  Democrat 70,181 

Henry  Clay,  Whig 67,867 

James  G.  Birney,  Abolitionist.  .   2,106 

What  pleased  the  Democrats  particu- 
larly was  that  Polk  carried  the  State  by 
a  majority  over  both  the  Whig  and  the 
Abolitionist  candidates.  There  was  no 
sort  of  indebtedness  due  the  third  party 
for  "favors  rendered"  in  running  a  candi- 
date of  their  own. 

The  situation  was  quite  diff'erent  in 
some  of  the  Eastern  States,  as  will  appear 
from  the  following  extracts  from  A.  K. 
McClure's  book  entitled  "Our  Presidents": 

"Mr.  Clay  enjoyed  a  much  larger  meas- 
ure of  personal  popularity  than  any  other 
man  in  the  Nation,  and  he  was  universal- 
ly accepted  as  the  most  gifted  political 
orator  of  his  day.  He  was  to  the  Whigs 
of  that  time  what  Blaine  was  to  the  Re- 
publicans during  his  several  unsuccessful 
battles  for  the  Presidency.  It  is  a  notable 
fact  in  political  history  that  no  pre-em- 
inent political  orator  ever  succeeded  in 
reaching  the  Presidency.  Garfield  was 
the  nearest  approach  to  it,  but  he  was  a 
contemporary  of  Blaine,  and  Blaine  far 
outstripped  him  either  on  the  hustings  or 
in  parliamentary  debate.  Clay  had  en- 
tered both  the  House  and  Senate  when  lit- 
tle more  than  eligible  by  age,  and  he  was 
admittedly  the  most  accomplished  presid- 
ing officer  the  House  ever  had.  He  was 
the  Commoner  of  the  war  of  1812,  and 
rendered  most  conspicuous  service  to  his 
country.  His  speeches  in  the  House  did 
more  than  the  persuasion  of  any  other 
dozen  men  to  force  the  young  Republic 
into  a  second  contest  with  England  on  the 
right  of  search  on  the  high  seas.  He  was 
always  strong  in  argument,  was  often  im- 
passioned and  superbly  eloquent,  and  in 
every  great  emergency  of  the  country  dur- 
ing the  first  half  of  the  present  century 
he  was  the  pacificator.  President  Madi- 
son was  most  reluctant  to  declare  war 
against  England,  and  he  yielded  to  it  only 
when  it  became  a  supreme  necessity  to 
obey  the  general  demand  of  the  country 
for  an  appeal  to  arms. 

"When  Clay  was  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent in  1844,  it  was  generally  believed 
that  he  would  have  an  easy  victory  over 
Van  Buren,  and  when  Polk,  of  Tennessee, 
was  made  the  compromise  candidate 
against  him,  the  Whigs  at  first  believed 
that  the  nomination  of  a  comparatively 
obscure  man  against  the  great  chieftain 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

of  the  Whigs  would  give  them  a  walkover. 
The  campaign  had  made  little  progress, 
however,  until  the  Whigs  discovered  that 
the  Democrats  were  going  to  "be  thorough- 
ly united  on  Polk,  and  that  he  was  prob- 
ably the  strongest  candidate  who  could 
have  been  nominated  against  Clay.  His 
chief  strength  was  in  his  negative  qual- 
ities. He  had  not  been  involved  in  any  of 
the  conflicts  of  ambition  among  the  Demo- 
cratic leaders.  He  was  regarded  as  the 
favorite  of  Jackson,  and  while  his  nom- 
ination had  been  made  without  any  previ- 
ous discussion  or  suggestion  of  his  claims 
to  the  Presidency,  he  had  filled  high  State 
and  national  positions  with  credit,  and  he 
could  not  be  accused  of  incompetency.  I 
doubt  indeed  whether  any  other  Democrat 
could  have  been  nominated  by  the  Demo- 
cratic convention  to  make  a  successful 
battle  against  Clay. 

"The  Whigs  entered  the  contest  defiant 
in  confidence  and  enthusiastic  to  a  degree 
that  had  never  before  been  exhibited  in 
the  support  of  any  candidate.  The  devo- 
tion of  the  Whigs  to  Clay  was  little  less 
than  idolatry,  and  strong  men  shed  scald- 
ing tears  over  his  defeat.  He  was  largely 
handicapped  in  his  battle  by  the  compli- 
cations put  upon  the  Whig  party  by  Presi- 
dent Tyler.  The  Cabinet  was  wholly 
Democratic  and  bitterly  against  Clay. 
Under  the  demoralization  caused  by 
Tyler's  betrayal  of  the  party  the  Whigs 
had  lost  the  House  in  1842,  but  they  re- 
tained their  mastery  in  the  Senate,  and  a 
new  peril  to  Clay  was  soon  developed  in 
the  growth  of  the  Abolition  sentiment  of 
western  New  York.  Neither  Clay  nor 
Polk  made  campaign  speeches,  and  both 
maintained  themselves  with  scrupulous 
dignity  throughout  the  long  and  excep- 
tionally desperate  contest. 

"Pennsylvania  was  then,  as  in  1860,  the 
pivotal  State  of  the  struggle,  and  the 
death  of  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
Governor  during  the  midsummer  deprived 
the  Whigs  of  a  source  of  strength  that 
most  likely  would  have  given  them  the 
State  in  October.  The  Democrats  had  a 
violent  factional  dispute  in  choosing  a 
candidate  for  Governor.  Mr.  Muhlenberg, 
who  had  been  a  bolting  candidate  against 
Governor  Wolfe  in  1835,  thereby  electing 
Ritner,  the  anti-Masonic  candidate,  was 
finally  nominated  for  Governor  over 
Francis  R.  Shunk,  the  candidate    of    the 

opposing  faction.  Muhlenberg  was  weak- 
ened by  his  aggressive  factional  record, 
and  the  Democrats  were  hardly  hopeful 
of  his  election,  but  he  died  just  when  the 
struggle  was  at  its  zenith,  and  Shunk  was 
then  unanimously  and  cordially  accepted 
as  the  Democratic  leader. 

"The  Whigs  had  nominated  General 
Markle  of  Westmoreland,  who  was  unques- 
tionably the  strongest  man  they  could 
have  presented.  The  Presidential  battle 
was  practically  fought  in  that  contest  for 
Governor,  and  when  Shunk  was  elected  by 
4,397  majority  there  were  few  who  cher- 
ished much  hope  of  Clay's  election.  Penn- 
sylvania, lost  in  October,  could  not  be  re- 
gained in  November,  but  the  Whigs  did 
not  in  anv  measure  relax  their  eff'orts,  and 
Polk  carried  the  State  over  Clay  by  6,332. 

"When  Pennsylvania  faltered  the  greatly 
impaired  hopes  of  the  Whigs  centered  in 
New  York,  as  it  was  believed  that  New 
York  might  decide  the  contest  in  favor  of 
Clay,  even  with  Pennsylvania  certain  to 
vote  against  him.  The  nomination  of  Silas 
Wright  for  Governor  had  thoroughly 
united  the  Van  Buren  followers  in  support 
of  Polk,  and  while  Clay  .stood  against  the 
annexation  of  Te.xas  and  the  extension  of 
the  slave  power,  the.  anti-slavery  senti- 
ment of  New  York  was  greatly  strength- 
ened by  the  fact  that  both  Clay  and 
Polk  were  Southerners  and  slaveholders. 
Birney.  the  Abolition  candidate,  received 
15,812  votes,  while  Polk's  majority  in  the 
State  was  5,106.  Mr.  Greeley,  who  was 
one  of  the  leaders  in  the  anti-.slavery  move- 
ment, and  much  more  practical  than  the 
organized  Abolitioni.sts,  bitterly  denounced 
that  party  for  defeating  Clay.  In  his  Whig 
Almanac  for  1845  he  had  an  elaborate  re- 
view of  the  contest,  in  which  he  said: 

The  year  1844  just  ended  has  witnessed  one  of 
the  most  extraordinary  political  contests  that  has 
ever  occurred.  So  nice  and  equal  a  balance  of 
parties;  so  universal  and  intense  an  interest;  so 
desperate  and  protracted  a  strupfjle,  are  entirely 
without  parallel.  .  .  .  James  K.  Polk  owes 
his  election  to  the  Birney  or  Liberty  party.  Had 
there  been  no  such  party,  drawing  its  votes  nine- 
tenths  from  the  Whig  ranks,  Mr.  Clay  would  have 
received  at  least  the  votes  of  New  York  and  Mich- 
igan, in  addition  to  those  actually  cast  for  him, 
givins:  him  14(i  electoral  votes  to  Polk's  129.  To 
Birney  &  Co.,  therefore,  is  the  country  indebted 
for  the  election  of  Polk  and  the  annexation  and 
anti-tariff  ascendency  in  the  Federal  Government. 

The  number  of  States  voting  was 
twenty-six,  the  same  as  in  1840.    The  new 



-  1 

Congressional  apportionment  had  reduced 
the  Representatives  from  242  to  223, 
making  the  total  number  of  electors  275. 
The  popular  vote  in  all  the  States  ex- 
cept South  Carolina  (which  for  many 
years  chose  its  electors  by  the  Legislature) 
was  as  follows: 

James  K.  Polk,  Democrat.  .1,337,243 

Henry  Clay,  Whig 1,299,068 

Jas.  G.  Birney,  Abolitionist      65,608 

Of  the  electoral  vote,  Polk  had  170,  Clay 

In  further  explanation  of  the  outcome 
of  the  campaign,  Col.  McClure  says : 

"The  Whigs,  in  keen  despair  over  the 
defeat  of  their  ablest  and  most  beloved 
champion,  charged  fraud  as  the  controlling 
factor  in  giving  the  Democrats  their  vic- 
tory, but  the  battle  had  been  fought  and 
lost,  and  there  was  nothing  left  for  them 
but  submission.  The  electoral  count  was 
uneventful,  and  Polk  and  Dallas  were  form- 
ally declared  elected  President  and  Vice- 
President  without  objection. 

"The  most  desperate  contests  outside  of 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania  were  made 
in  Tennessee  and  Delaware.  Tennessee 
was  the  home  of  Polk,  and  the  "Old  Hero 
of  New  Orleans"  threw  himself  into  the 
contest  for  Polk  with  tireless  energy.  He 
inspired  his  veteran  followers  not  only  be- 
cause he  wanted  Polk  elected,  but  because 
he  much  more  wanted  Clay  defeated.  Clay 
had  defeated  him  for  President  in  the 
House  in  1825,  and  Jackson  never  forgot 
a  friend  and  rarely  forgave  an  enemy.  It 
v/as  many  days  after  the  election  before 
the  vote  of  Tennessee  could  be  ascertained, 
and  it  was  claimed  by  both  parties  until 
the  official  vote  was  declared.  It  was 
finally  announced  that  Clay  had  carried 
the  State  by  1 13,  and  the  success  of  Clay 
in  that  State  was  the  only  silver  lining  the 
Whigs  had  to  the  dark  cloud  of  their  de- 

"Another  memorable  battle,  though  not 
in  any  sense  an  important  contest  as  af- 
fecting the  result,  was  fought  in  Delaware. 
The  States  did  not  then  vote  for  President 
on  the  same  day  as  now.  All  of  them  voted 
for  Presidential  electors  in  the  month  of 
November,  although  at  that  time  nearly  all 
the  States  elected  their  State  officers  and 
Congressmen  earlier  in  the  year.     Dela- 

ware, with  only  three  electoral  votes,  held 
both  her  State  and  Presidential  elections 
on  the  second  Tuesday  of  November,  and 
when  her  election  day  came  around  it  was 
known  to  all  that  Clay  was  absolutely  de- 
feated for  President. 

"New  York  and  Pennsylvania  had  voted 
for  Polk  a  week  before,  and  on  the  second 
Tuesday  of  November  only  Massachusetts 
and  Delaware  were  left  among  the  States 
that  had  not  chosen  electors.  Massachu- 
setts was  Whig  and  hardly  contested,  but 
Delaware  made  a  most  heroic  battle  for 
Clay,  even  when  it  was  known  that  a  vic- 
tory in  the  little  Diamond  State  could  not 
aid  the  election  of  their  favorite.  The 
Democrats,  inspired  by  their  positively 
assured  success  in  the  national  contest, 
exhausted  their  resources  and  efforts  to 
win,  but  in  the  largest  vote  ever  cast  in 
the  State,  Clay  won  by  287  majority,  re- 
ceiving a  larger  vote  than  was  cast  for  the 
Whig  candidates  for  Governor  or  for  Con- 
gress, both  of  whom  were  successful,  the 
first  by  45  majority  and  the  last  by  173." 

In  remembrance  of  the  log  cabin,  hard 
cider  and  coon  skin  campaign  of  1840,  the 
Democratic  national  platform  adopted  at 
Baltimore,  in  May,  1844,  started  out  with 
this  stinging  declaration: 

"Resolved,  That  the  American  Democ- 
racy place  their  trust,  not  in  factitious 
symbols,  not  in  displays  and  appeals  in- 
sulting to  the  judgment  and  subversive 
of  the  intellect  of  the  people,  but  in  a  clear 
reliance  upon  the  intelligence,  patriotism, 
and  the  discriminating  justice  of  the 
American  people." 

The  1844  platform  consisted  of  fifteen 
planks,  nine  of  which  were  bodily  taken 
from  the  Van  Buren  platform  of  1840.  It 
is  worthy  of  note  that  the  latter  docu- 
ment was  preceded  by  this  declaration : 

"Resolved,  That  the  convention  deems 
it  expedient,  at  the  present  time,  not  to 
choose  between  the  individuals  in  nomina- 
tion, but  to  leave  the  decision  to  their  Re- 
publican fellow-citizens  in  the  several 
States,  trusting  that  before  the  election 
shall  take  place  their  opinion  will  become 
so  concentrated  as  to  secure  the  choice  of 
a  Vice-President  by  the  Electoral  College." 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

Using  the  term  "Republican"  even  dur- 
ing the  Jacksonian  era  of  the  Democratic 
party  serves  as  an  indication  of  the 
tenacity  with  which  members  of  the  organ- 
ization adhered  to  that  pai'ty  appellation. 
In  the  National  Convention  of  1848  that 
nominated  Cass  and  Butler,  the  noted 
Arkansas  fire-eater,  William  L.  Yancey, 
persisted  in  using  the  term  "Republican" 
instead  of  Democrat. 


In  the  "good  old  days"  there  turned  up 
occasionally  an  individual  pre-eminent  for 
devotion  to  party,  self-sacrificing  in  spirit 
and  action,  and  charmingly  free  from 
sordidness.  Within  this  category  comes 
James  G.  Read,  who  represented  the  coun- 
ties of  Daviess  and  Martin  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  five  years  successively, 
the  county  of  Clark  two  years,  then  served 
nine  years  in  the  Senate.  While  a  State 
Senator  he  was  twice  made  President  of 
the  Senate,  or  acting  Lieutenant-Governor. 
Prior  to  that  he  was  twice  the  Democratic 
nominee  for  Governor,  first  in  1831,  then 
in  1834,  and  defeated  both  times.  In  addi- 
tion to  all  this,  he  officiated  several  times 
as  President  of  State  and  district  conven- 
tions and  as  candidate  for  presidential 
elector.  The  compensation  for  service  in 
the  State  Legislature  was  meager,  barely 
enough  to  defray  expenses  at  the  Capital. 
Making  two  unsuccessful  races  for  the 
Governorship  must  have  entailed  more  ex- 
pense. Mr.  Read  is  entitled  to  honorable 
mention  in  the  first  and  only  history  of 
the  Indiana  Democracy. 

For  years  a  Democratic  gathering  in 
Indiana  seemed  incomplete  without  the 
presence  of  Robert  Dale  Owen.  He  was  a 
much  greater  man  than  his  fellow-citizens 
seemed  to  realize.  That,  however,  is  not 
unusual  in  many  parts  of  the  world,  In- 
diana not  excepted. 

Mr.  Owen  was  born  in  Glasgow,  Scot- 
land,  November   9,    1801.      In   his   native 

land  he  pursued  classical  studies;  came  to 
the  United  States  with  his  parents  in  1832, 
and  located  in  New  Harmony,  and  aided  in 
the  establishment  of  a  social  community. 
He  was  editor  of  the  Free  Euqnirer, 
published  in  New  York  1828-1831.  The 
.year  following  he  returned  to  New  Har- 
mony, and  three  years  later  he  was  elected 
a  member  of  the  Legislature  and  re-elected 
two  or  three  times  in  succession.  Recog- 
nition and  appreciation  of  his  eminent 
abilities  led  to  his  election  to  Congress  for 
two  terms,  from  1843  to  1847.  Amidst  one 
of  those  strange  political  upheavals,  the 
cause  of  which  few  can  fathom,  Mr.  Owen 
was  defeated  in  his  third  congressional 
race.  He  served  with  distinction  as  a 
member  of  the  Constitutional  Convention 
of  1850.  From  1853  to  1858  he  repre- 
sented the  United  States  in  a  diplomatic 
capacity.  He  died  at  Lake  George,  N.  Y., 
June  25,  1877. 

Mr.  Owen,  richly  endowed  with  a 
philosophical  mind,  was  a  public  speaker 
who  never  failed  to  interest  his  audiences. 
He  was  a  thorough  believer  in  the  political 
philosophy  of  Thomas  Jefferson  and 
never  tired  of  expatiating  on  the  sublime 
teachings  of  the  author  of  the  imperish- 
able Declaration  of  Independence.  For 
this  devotion  to  genuine  democracy,  Mr. 
Owen  was  fiercely  and  not  infrequently 
coarsely  assailed  by  the  Indianapolis 
Journal  and  kindred  unscrupulous  partisan 
publications.  Denunciation  fell  upon  his 
head  for  proclaiming  on  all  suitable  occa- 
sions undying  faith  in  these  Jeffersonian 
Doctrines  : 

"Honesty  is  the  first  chapter  of  the  book 
of  wisdom." 

"I  have  never  believed  there  was  one 
code  of  morality  for  a  public  and  another 
for  a  pi-ivate  man." 

"To  inform  the  minds  of  the  people  and 
to  follow  their  will  is  the  chief  duty  of 
those  placed  at  their  head." 

"The  information  of  the  people  at  large 
can  alone  make  them  the  safe,  as  they  are 
the  sole,  depository  of  our  religious  and 
political  freedom." 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

"There  is  a  debt  of  service  due  from 
every  man  to  his  country,  proportioned  to 
the  bounties  which  nature  and  fortune 
have  measured  to  him." 

"It  is  impossible  not  to  be  sensible  that 
we  are  acting  for  all  mankind;  that  cir- 
cumstances denied  to  others,  but  indulged 
to  us,  have  imposed  on  us  the  duty  of 
proving  what  is  the  degree  of  freedom  and 
self-government  in  which  a  society  may 
venture  to  have  its  individual  members." 

"The  station  which  we  occupy  among 
the  nations  of  the  earth  is  honorable,  but 
awful.  Trusted  with  the  destinies  of  this 
solitary  republic  of  the  world,  the  only 
monument  of  human  rights  and  the  sole 
depository  of  the  sacred  fire  of  freedom 
and  self-government,  from  hence  it  is  to 
be  lighted  up  in  other  regions  of  the  earth, 
if  other  regions  of  the  earth  ever  become 
susceptible  of  its  benign  influence.  All 
mankind  ought  then,  with  us,  to  rejoice 
in  its  prosperous  and  sympathize  in  its 
adverse  fortunes,  as  involving  everything 
that  is  dear  to  man.  And  to  what  sacri- 
fices of  interest  or  commerce  ought  not 
these  considerations  to  animate  us?  To 
what  compromises  of  opinion  and  inclina- 
tion, to  maintain  harmony  and  union 
among  ourselves,  and  to  preserve  from  all 
danger  this  hallowed  ark  of  human  hope 
and  human  happiness.  That  diff'erences 
of  opinion  should  arise  among  men,  on 
politics,  on  religion,  and  on  every  other 
topic  of  human  inquiry,  and  that  these 
should  be  freely  expressed  in  a  country 
where  all  our  faculties  are  free,  is  to  be 

Faith  in  Jeffersonian  doctrines  is 
strengthened  in  turning  to  his  first  inau- 
gural address  and  cogitating  over  these 
lofty  sentiments: 

"I  know,  indeed,  that  some  honest  men 
fear  that  a  Republican  Government  can- 
not be  strong;  that  this  Government  is 
not  strong  enough.  But  would  the  honest 
patriot,  in  the  full  tide  of  successful  ex- 

periment, abandon  a  Government  which 
has  so  far  kept  us  free  and  firm,  on  the 
theoretic  and  visionary  fear  that  this 
Government,  the  world's  best  hope,  may 
by  possibility  want  energy  to  preserve  it- 
self? I  trust  not.  I  believe  this,  on  the 
contrary,  the  strongest  Government  on 
earth.  I  believe  it  the  only  one  where 
every  man.  at  the  call  of  the  laws,  would 
fly  to  the  standard  of  the  law,  and  would 
meet  invasions  of  the  public  order,  as  his 
own  personal  concern. 

"Let  us,  then,  with  courage  and  confi- 
dence, pursue  our  own  Federal  and  Re- 
publican principles,  our  attachment  to  our 
Union  and  representative  Government. 
Kindly  separated  by  nature  and  a  wide 
ocean  from  the  exterminating  havoc  of  one 
quarter  of  the  globe;  too  high-minded  to 
endure  the  degradations  of  the  others; 
possessing  a  chosen  country,  with  room 
enough  for  our  descendants  to  the  hun- 
dredth and  thousandth  generation ;  enter- 
taining a  due  sense  of  our  equal  rights  to 
the  use  of  our  own  faculties,  to  the  acquisi- 
tions of  our  industry,  to  honor  and  con- 
fidence from  our  fellow-citizens,  resulting, 
not  from  birth,  but  from  our  actions  and 
their  sense  of  them;  enlightened  by  a 
benign  religion,  professed,  indeed,  and 
practiced  in  various  forms,  yet  all  of  them 
including  honesty,  truth,  temperance, 
gratitude,  and  the  love  of  man ;  acknowl- 
edging and  adoring  an  overruling  Provi- 
dence, which  by  all  its  dispensations  proves 
that  it  delights  in  the  happiness  of  man 
here  and  his  greater  happiness  hereafter; 
with  all  these  blessings,  what  more  is 
necessary  to  make  us  a  happy  and  pros- 
perous people?  Still  one  thing  more,  fel- 
low-citizens— a  wise  and  frugal  Govern- 
ment, which  shall  restrain  men  from  in- 
juring one  another,  which  shall  leave  them 
otherwise  free  to  regulate  their  own  pur- 
suits of  industry  and  improvement,  and 
shall  not  take  from  the  mouth  of  labor 
the  bread  it  has  earned.  This  is  the  sum 
of  good  government,  and  this  is  necessary 
to  close  the  circle  of  our  felicities." 

[Chapter  VIII.] 


FROM  1833   ro  1841 

P  TO  1833,  as  set  forth  in  pre- 
ceding chapters,  Indiana  was 
represented  in  the  lower  House 
of  Congress  by  three  members. 
Under  the  census  of  1830  a  new 
apportionment  was  made.  In- 
diana had  grown  wonderfully. 
Her  population  in  a  single  decade  had  more 
than  doubled.  In  1820  it  was  147,178;  in 
1830  it  had  risen  to  343,031 — an  increase 
of  195,853,  or  133.1  per  cent.  This  entitled 
Indiana  to  seven  seats  in  the  House  of 
Representatives  at  Washington.  No  em- 
barrassment was  occasioned  the  electorate 
of  Indiana  by  this  demand  upon  its  con- 
gressional timber.  It  had  an  abundance 
thereof,  even  in  those  days,  and  could 
easily  have  furnished  a  much  larger 
supply.  Men  of  statesmanlike  qualities 
had  flocked  into  the  young  commonwealth 
from  East  and  South,  and  were  still 
coming  with  the  influx  of  new  population. 
To  the  Twenty-third  Congress  (1833  to 
1835)  Indiana  sent  this  array  of  talent: 

1.  Ratliff  Boon. 

2.  John  Ewing. 

3.  John  Carr. 

4.  Amos  Lane. 

5.  Jonathan  McCarty. 

6.  George  S.  Kinnard. 

7.  Edward  A.  Hannegan. 

Boon,  Carr  and  Hannegan  have  already 
had  mention.  John  Ewing  was  born  at 
sea,  while  his  parents  were  on  their  way 
from  Cork  to  Baltimore.  The  family 
located  in  Indiana.  Young  Ewing  was  edu- 
cated in  the  public  schools;  established  a 
Whig  paper  at  Wabash,  called  the  Tran- 
script: engaged  in  mercantile  pursuits  at 
Vincennes;  served  several  terms  in  both 
branches  of  the  Legislature;  was  first 
elected  to  Congress  by  a  majority  of  two 

over  Dr.  -John  W.  Davis,  who  in  turn  de- 
feated him  two  years  later  by  about  1,000; 
was  thereafter  again  elected  to  Congress, 
serving  from  1837  to  1839.  He  died  at 
Vincennes,  April  6,  1858,  highly  esteemed 
by  all  the  people,  regardless  of  their 
political  affiliation. 

Amos  Lane  was  born  near  Aurora,  N. 
Y.,  March  1,  1778;  educated  in  the  public 
schools;  practiced  law  at  Lawrenceburg; 
served  as  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives;  twice  elected  to  Congress  as 
a  Democrat  and  defeated  as  a  candidate 
for  a  third  term. 

Jonathan  McCarty  was  a  native  of  Ten- 
nessee; educated  in  the  public  schools; 
located  in  Franklin  county;  served  in  the 
State  Legislature;  removed  to  Conners- 
ville,  Fayette  county ;  held  several  county 
offices;  served  two  terms  in  Congress  as 
a  Whig;  defeated  for  a  third  term;  was 
a  Harrison  elector  in  1840.  Died  in 
Keokuk,  Iowa,  in  1855. 

George  S.  Kinnard  was  born  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, 1803;  was  by  his  widowed  mother 
taken  to  Tennessee,  where  he  completed 
his  preparatory  studies ;  located  in  Indian- 
apolis; held  several  local  offices;  studied 
law  and  was  admitted  to  the  bar;  served 
in  the  Legislature  and  was  by  it  elected 
to  the  office  of  State  Auditor;  was  made 
colonel  of  State  militia;  twice  elected  as 
a  Democrat  to  Congress,  and  served  from 
March  4,  1833,  until  his  death  from  in- 
juries received  in  the  explosion  on  the 
steamer  "Flora."  on  the  Ohio  River,  No- 
vember 25.  1836.  William  Herod,  a  Whig, 
was  chosen  to  fill  the  unexpired  term. 

In  the  Twenty-fourth  Congress  (1835 
to  1837)  these  gentlemen  represented 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

1.  Ratliff  Boon. 

2.  John  W.  Davis. 

3.  John  Carr. 

4.  Amos  Lane. 

5.  Jonathan  McCarty. 

6.  George   S.   Kinnard    (died). 

6.  William  Herod  (to  fill  vacancy). 

7.  Edvifard  A.  Hannegan. 

John  Wesley  Davis  was  born  in  New 
Holland,  Lancaster  county,  Pa.,  April  16, 
1799 ;  graduated  from  the  Baltimore  Medi- 
cal College  in  1821 ;  moved  to  Carlisle,  Sul- 
livan county,  Ind.,  in  1823;  member  of  the 
Legislature  for  several  terms;  served  as 
Speaker  of  the  House  in  1832;  appointed 
commissioner  to  negotiate  an  Indian 
treaty  in  1834;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to 
Congress  from  1835  to  1837  and  defeated 
for  re-election  by  two  votes ;  thereafter  re- 
turned to  Congress  from  1839  to  1841; 
given  a  rest  by  the  Harrison  tidal  wave, 
but  triumphantly  elected  and  re-elected 
from  1843  to  1847;  made  Speaker  of  the 
National  House  December,  1845.  Upon 
the  conclusion  of  his  congressional  serv- 
ice he  was  again  sent  to  the  State  Legis- 
lature and  chosen  Speaker  of  the  House, 
having  in  caucus  defeated  William  H. 
English,  who  at  that  time  began  his  politi- 
cal career.  President  Polk  appointed  Dr. 
Davis  as  minister  to  China,  in  which  capac- 
ity he  served  from  January  3,  1848,  to 
May  25,  1850.  Having  several  times  rep- 
resented Indiana  in  Democratic  national 
conventions  and  achieved  a  national  repu- 
tation, he  was  chosen  president  of  the 
Baltimore  convention  that  nominated 
Franklin  Pierce  for  the  Presidency  in  1852. 
President  Pierce  appointed  Dr.  Davis  as 
Governor  of  Oregon.  The  appointment 
was  at  first  declined,  but  finally  accepted. 
The  office  evidently  was  not  to  his  liking. 
Holding  it  a  year,  he  resigned  and  returned 
to  his  beloved  Indiana.  In  1856  he  was 
again  elected  to  the  State  Legislature  by 
what  he  appreciatively  characterized  as 
"the  most  flattering  vote  I  ever  received 
from  the  good  people  of  Sullivan  county, 
among  whom  I  have  resided  for  more 
than  thirty-five  years." 

The  last  oflice  to  which  Mr.  Davis  was 
assigned  was  that  of  visitor  to  West  Point 
Military  Academy,  of  which  he  was  made 
president.  He  lived  until  August  22,  1859, 
when  he  died  at  his  cherished  home  in 
Carlisle.  With  his  demise  terminated  the 
career  of  one  of  Indiana's  most  remark- 
able and  distinguished  men.  He  was  a 
forceful  speaker,  a  clear  thinker,  a  genial 
gentleman,  a  thoroughly  honest  man,  a 
true  lover  of  his  country,  and  in  sunshine 
or  gloom  ever  an  ardent  but  always  a  con- 
scientious Democrat. 

William  Herod  began  the  practice  of  law 
at  Columbus,  Ind.,  served  as  member  of 
the  State  Senate,  and  was  elected  to  Con- 
gress to  fill  the  unexpired  term  of  George 
S.  Kinnard.  Herod  was  re-elected  to  the 
Twenty-fifth  Congress  by  an  overwhelm- 
ing majority  over  former  Governor  James 
Brown  Ray.  In  his  next  race  for  re-elec- 
tion Herod  was  defeated  by  William  W. 
Wick,  Democrat. 

In  the  Twenty-fifth  Congress  (1837  to 
1839)  these  gentlemen  served  their  con- 
stituents : 

1.  Ratliff  Boon. 

2.  John  Ewing. 

3.  William  Graham. 

4.  George  H.  Dunn. 

5.  James  H.  Rariden. 

6.  William  Herod. 

7.  Albert  S.  White. 

William  Graham  was  a  Kentuckian;  be- 
came an  inhabitant  of  Indiana  Territory 
in  1811,  settling  at  Vallonia;  there  prac- 
ticed law ;  member  of  the  Territorial  Legis- 
lature in  1812;  member  of  the  first  Gen- 
eral Assembly;  delegate  to  the  State  con- 
stitutional convention  of  1816;  Speaker  of 
the  House  of  Representatives  in  1820; 
member  of  the  State  Senate;  elected  as  a 
Whig  to  the  Congress  of  1837  to  1839. 
Died  near  Vallonia,  August  17,  1858. 

George  Hebford  Dunn  resided  at  Law- 
rencehurg;  served  three  terms  in  the  Leg- 
islature; Treasurer  of  State  from  1841 
to  1843;  defeated  as  the  Whig  candidate 
for  Congress  in  1835;  had  better  luck  next 



18  16-1 

time,  but  was  again  defeated  in  third  race. 
Was  a  man  of  superior  ability.  Died  at 
Lawrenceburg  January  12,  1854. 

James  Rariden  was  a  native  of  Ken- 
tucky ;  practiced  law  at  Centerville,  Wayne 
county;  served  in  both  branches  of  the 
State  Legislature;  delegate  to  the  State 
constitutional  convention;  twice  elected  to 
Congress  as  a  Whig.  Died  in  Cambridge 

As  members  of  the  Twenty-sixth  Con- 
gress (1889  to  1841)  these  gentlemen  were 
chosen  to  serve  their  constituents: 

1.  George  H.  Proffit. 

2.  John  W.  Davis. 

3.  John  Carr. 

4.  Thomas  Smith. 

5.  James  H.  Rariden. 

6.  William  W.  Wick. 

7.  Tilghman  A.  Howard. 

George  H.  ProfRt  was  a  native  of  New 
Orleans,  La.  After  establishing  himself 
in  Indiana  he  was  four  times  elected  to 
the  Legislature.  Twice  elected  to  Con- 
gress as  a  Whig.  Appointed  by  President 
Tyler  as  minister  to  Brazil;  the  Senate 
having  refused  to  confirm  the  appoint- 
ment, he  returned  to  the  United  States 
after  serving  one  year  and  two  months. 
Died  in  Louisville,  Ky.,  September  5,  1847. 

Thomas  Smith  was  a  native  of  Pennsyl- 
vania; moved  to  Indiana  and  engaged  in 
tanning  at  Versailles,  Ripley  county; 
served  so  acceptably  as  a  representative 
and  State  Senator  that  he  was  four  times 
nominated  by  the  Democrats  for  Congress, 
triumphantly  elected  three  times  and  de- 
feated in  his  second  race.  While  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Legislature  he  vigorously 
opposed  the  wild  schemes  of  internal  im- 
provement which  bankrupted  the  State 
and  brought  financial  dishonor  upon  her 
name.  His  course  upon  this  subject 
added  to  his  popularity  at  home  and  was 
the  immediate  cause  of  his  subsequent 
political  advancement.  As  a  member  of 
the  constitutional  convention  he  protested 
earnestly  and  eloquently  against  a 
proposed    clause    discriminating    against 

negroes.  His  sense  of  justice  would  not 
permit  him  to  countenance  injustice.  He 
was  singularly  free  of  narrowness  and 
prejudice.  His  manner  as  a  debater  was 
plain,  straightforward,  emphatic,  impres- 
sive. As  a  Jeffersonian  he  held  very  pro- 
nounced views  on  the  .slavery  question. 
He  recognized  it  as  an  institution  older 
than  the  Union  itself,  but  nevertheless  he 
could  never  persuade  himself  that  it  was 
other  than  an  evil.  Holding  these  views, 
he  deplored  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise.  Unwilling  to  subscribe  to 
doctrines  that  his  conscience  could  not 
approve,  he  regretfully  severed  his  affilia- 
tion with  the  party  that  had  sent  him 
three  times  to  Congress,  and  in  course  of 
time  identified  himself  with  anti-slavery 
organizations.  He  died  at  Versailles  April 
12,  1876. 

An  exceedingly  interesting  character 
was  William  Watson  Wick.  He  was  born 
in  Cannonsburg,  Pa.,  February  23,  1796, 
taught  school,  studied  medicine,  and  then 
law.  Upon  his  admission  to  the  bar  he 
began  practice  at  Connersville,  Ind.,  in 
1820.  By  the  Legislature  he  was  elected 
Secretary  of  State  in  1825;  State  at- 
torney for  the  fifth  judicial  circuit, 
1829-1831;  president  judge,  1831-1835. 
Was  three  times  elected  to  Congress 
and  defeated  in  his  second  race.  In 
recognition  of  his  services  to  the 
Democi'atic  party  he  was  made  postmaster 
of  Indianapolis  under  the  Pierce  adminis- 
tration, serving  from  1853  until  1857. 
Originally  he  was  a  Whig.  Like  a  good 
many  other  Indianians  of  that  period  he 
had  no  hesitancy  about  changing  party 
affiliations  when  he  could  no  longer  approve 
its  policies.  He  quit  the  further  study 
of  medicine  because  he  did  not  care  to 
be  contemplating  men's  miseries.  Hold- 
ing public  positions  with  meager  salary 
attachments  kept  him  poor.  His  worldly 
possessions  rarely  reached  a  thousand  dol- 
lars, all  told.  Like  many  other  public  men 
of  his   day,   he  was   convivially   inclined. 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

Poor  in  purse,  he  was  quite  desirous  of 
retaining  the  Indianapolis  postoffice.  He 
had  gotten  along  in  years  and  understood 
full  well  that  resuming  the  practice  of  law, 
after  having  been  out  for  so  long  a  time, 
would  afford  but  poor  picking.  He  was 
sorely  grieved  that  he  should  be  turned 
out  of  office.  But  he  realized  that  he  had 
taken  a  firm  stand  on  the  slavery  question, 
and  that  he  had  committed  himself  un- 
equivocally against  the  attempt  to  foist 
slavery  upon  Kansas.  In  letters  to  Indiana 
members  of  Congress  he  entreated  them 
to  resist  further  encroachments  by  the 
slave  power.  This  made  him  a  political 
heretic  in  the  eyes  of  Senator  Jesse  D. 
Bright,  who  had  the  ear  of  President 
Buchanan.  At  the  expiration  of  his  four- 
year  term,  William  Watson  Wick  had  to 
step  down  and  out  and  turn  the  manage- 
ment of  the  Indianapolis  postoffice  over  to 
John  M.  Talbott.  It  was,  under  the  cir- 
cumstances, a  severe  blow  to  Mr.  Wick, 
but  he  neither  raved  nor  moaned.  He  was 
accustomed  to  adversity;  he  never  gave 
much  thought  to  tomorrow.  His  father, 
a  Presbyterian  minister,  intended  his 
William  Watson  to  qualify  himself  for  the 
ministry,  but  the  young  man  could  not 
reconcile  himself  to  that  calling ;  there  was 
too  much  of  the  wag  in  him  for  such 
sedateness.  Referring  to  the  fact  that 
his  father  was  a  preacher  and  his  uncle  a 
merchant,  Judge  Wick  once  dryly  re- 
marked: "One  chose  piety  and  poverty, 
the  other  merchandising  and  money-get- 
ting, and  they  both  succeeded.  One  laid 
up  treasures  in  heaven,  the  other  on  earth, 
and  verily  they  both  had  their  reward." 

When  the  campaign  of  1860  came  on 
Judge  Wick  took  the  stump  for  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  earnestly  and  eloquently  pleading 
the  cause  of  popular  sovereignty  and  vig- 
orously denouncing  the  unreasonableness 
of  the  proslavery  element  that  was  sup- 
porting Breckinridge  and  Lane.  Shortly 
after  the  defeat  of  Douglas,  Judge  Wick 
left  Indianapolis  to  take  up  his  abode  with 
his  daughter,  Mrs.  William  H.  Overstreet, 

at  Franklin,  Ind.  He  died  at  her  home 
May  19,  1869,  and  was  buried  in  the 
Franklin  cemetery. 

In  the  Twenty-seventh  Congress  (1841 
to  1843)  Indiana  was  represented  by  this 
exceptionally  able  delegation: 

1.  George  H.  Proffit. 

2.  Richard  W.  Thompson. 

3.  Joseph  L.  White. 

4.  James  H.  Cravens. 

5.  Andrew  Kennedy. 

6.  David  Wallace. 

7.  Henry  S.  Lane. 

Among  these  exceptionally  able  men  was 
Richard  Wigginton  Thompson,  the  greater 
part  of  his  life  a  resident  of  Terre  Haute. 
He  was  popularly  known  as  "Silver- 
tongued  Dick  Thompson,"  and  in  later 
years  acquired  distinction  in  the  literary 
world.  The  "History  of  Protective  Tariff 
Laws,"  issued  in  1888,  may  be  said  to  con- 
stitute his  most  important  work  in  this 
line.  He  was  born  in  Culpeper  county,  Va., 
June  9,  1809;  pursued  classical  studies; 
moved  to  Louisville,  Ky.,  in  1831 ;  clerk  in 
a  store;  moved  to  Lawrence  county,  Ind.; 
taught  school;  studied  law,  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  in  1834,  and  began  practice  in 
Bedford,  Ind. ;  member  of  the  State  House 
of  Representatives  1834-1836;  served  in 
State  Senate  1836-1838  and  served  for  a 
short  time  as  president  pro  tempore; 
elected  as  a  Whig  to  the  Twenty-seventh 
Congress  (March  4,  1841-March  3,  1843)  ; 
unsuccessful  candidate  for  re-election; 
presidential  elector  in  1840  on  the  Harri- 
son and  Tyler  ticket ;  re-elected  as  a  Whig 
to  the  Thirtieth  Congress  (March  4,  1847- 
March  3,  1849)  ;  declined  a  renomination ; 
declined  the  office  of  Austrian  minister, 
tendered  him  by  President  Taylor,  the  of- 
fice of  Recorder  of  the  General  Land  Office, 
tendered  by  President  Fillmore,  and  a  seat 
on  the  bench  of  the  Court  of  Claims,  ten- 
dered by  President  Lincoln;  presidential 
elector  on  the  Lincoln  and  Johnson  ticket 
in  1864:  delegate  to  the  Republican 
national  convention  in  Chicago  in  1868  and 
in  Cincinnati  in  1876;  Judge  of  the  Fifth 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  181G-1  9  16 

Irdiana  Circuit  Court  1867-1869;  Secre- 
tary of  the  Navy  under  President  Hayes 
from  March  12,  1877,  until  his  resignation, 
December  21.  1880;  chairman  of  the 
American  Committee  of  the  Panama  Canal 
Company ;  director  of  the  Panama  Rail- 
road Company.  Died  in  Terre  Haute,  Ind., 
February  9.  1900. 

Joseph  L.  White  was  born  in  Cherry 
Valley,  N.  Y.,  fitted  himself  for  the  law, 
and  began  practice  in  the  historic  town 
of  Madison.  Served  one  term  in  Con- 
gress, then  moved  to  New  York,  and  there 
resumed  the  practice  of  law.  Later  on 
he  engaged  in  manufacturing.  Died 
January  12,  1861. 

James  H.  Cravens  was  by  birth  a  Vir- 
ginian;  moved  to  Madison  in  1829  and 
engaged  in  agricultural  pursuits.  Later 
on  he  located  in  Ripley  county,  where  he 
practiced  law  and  managed  a  farm.  Was 
an  elector  on  the  Harrison  ticket  in  1840 
and  served  one  term  in  Congress  as  a 
Whig.  Though  a  Virginian  by  birth,  he 
was  a  pronounced  anti-slavery  man.  As 
such  he  was  nominated  for  Governor  by 
the  Freesoilers  in  1848,  and,  of  course, 
defeated.  His  devotion  to  the  Union  im- 
pelled him,  at  the  age  of  sixty,  to  enlist 
in  the  Eighty-third  Regiment  of  Indiana 
Volunteers,  of  which  he  was  made  lieu- 
tenant-colonel. He  died  at  Osgood,  Ind., 
December  4,  1876,  and  was  buried  at  Ver- 

Andrew  Kennedy  was  one  of  the 
noted  men  of  the  State.  Born  in  Dayton, 
Ohio,  July  24,  1810,  he  came  with  his 
parents  to  Indiana,  locating  on  the  Indian 
reservation  near  Lafayette.  Soon  after  he 
went  to  reside  with  an  aunt  in  Conners- 
ville,  where  he  became  an  apprentice  in  a 
blacksmith  shop.  While  in  the  act  of 
shoeing  a  horse  he  was  kicked  so  severely 
that  continuation  at  that  trade  was 
deemed  physically  impracticable  and  in- 
advisable. Fairly  well  equipped  with  a 
common  school  education,  he  qualified 
himself  for  the  law.     Located  at  Muncie, 

he  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1830.  By 
reason  of  his  fine  natural  abilities  and  his 
thorough  understanding  of  human  nature 
he  built  up  a  remunerative  practice.  Pos- 
sessing the  elements  of  per.sonal  popular- 
ity in  an  eminent  degree,  he  was  elected 
a  member  of  the  Legislature  in  1835  and 
promoted  to  the  Senate  in  1838.  As  a 
candidate  for  Presidential  elector  in  1840 
he  made  quite  a  reputation  as  a  stump 
speaker.  Before  the  expiration  of  his 
term  as  Senator  he  was  elected  to  Con- 
gress and  thereafter  twice  re-elected, 
serving  from  1841  to  1847.  A  fourth 
nomination  was  tendered  him,  but  de- 
clined. He  evinced  a  desire  to  be  made 
United  States  Senator,  to  succeed  Edward 
A.  Hannegan,  and  at  the  opening  of  the 
legislative  session,  in  December,  1841, 
proceeded  to  Indianapolis  to  make  a  can- 
vass for  that  high  office.  He  was  stricken 
with  .smallpox,  which  dread  disease  pre- 
cipitated a  rather  unceremonious  ad- 
journment of  the  General  Assembly, 
though  this  was  the  only  case  in  town. 
He  died  the  last  day  of  December  of  that 
year  at  the  Palmer  House,  for  many  years 
Democratic  headquarters.  His  body  was 
taken  at  the  dead  of  night,  wrapped  in 
the  clothes  of  the  bed  in  which  he  died,  to 
the  cemetery,  attended  only  by  the  hack 
driver  and  sexton,  and  consigned  to  Moth- 
er Earth.  The  hackman  and  the  sexton 
who  performed  the  sad  task  of  laying  him 
away  in  his  tomb  contracted  the  fatal  dis- 
ease which  took  him  off  and  in  less  than 
two  weeks  thereafter  were  laid  by  his 
side.  "A  .sad  ending,"  as  Woollen  put  it, 
"was  this  of  a  career  which  promised  so 
much."  Deep-felt  sorrow  was  manife.sted 
throughout  the  State  over  this  .sad  ending 
of  an  extraordinary  career.  While  in 
Congress  Mr.  Kennedy  delivered  a  re- 
markable speech  on  the  celebrated  Oregon 
bill,  declaring  himself  in  favor  of  the 
"fifty-four  forty  or  fight"  doctrine,  gen- 
erally espoused  by  belligerent  Democrats. 
So  earnest  was  his  delivery  that  he  fainted 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

at  the  conclusion  of  his  speech.  Upon  re- 
covery congratulations  on  his  forensic 
effort  were  literally  showered  upon  him. 
Among  those  who  thus  manifested  their 
appreciation  of  natural  oratory  was  John 
Quincy  Adams,  a  bitter  opponent  of  the 
Oregon  measure.  Approaching  the 
"Blacksmith  orator,"  the  illustrious  Mas- 
sachusetts statesman  said:  "Kennedy, 
let  me  take  by  the  hand  the  greatest  nat- 
ural orator  in  America."  In  one  of  his 
characteristic  speeches  in  the  Senate  the 
"Little  Giant  of  the  West,"  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  made  this  reference  to  the  Con- 
gressman from  the  Muncie  district:  "I 
am  reminded  of  the  case  of  Hon.  Andrew 
Kennedy,  a  Democratic  member  of  Con- 
gress from  Indiana,  who,  some  years  ago, 
was  elected  from  a  district  which  had 
about  four  thousand  Whig  majority.  One 
day  he  got  up  to  make  a  speech  in  the 
House,  when  one  of  his  colleagues  asked 
how  he  got  there.  He  replied:  'I  come 
from  the  strongest  Whig  district  in  the 
State  of  Indiana,  a  district  that  gave  Gen- 
eral Harrison  a  bigger  majority  than  any 
other  in  the  United  States  of  America.  I 
beat  three  of  the  ablest  Whigs  there  were 
in  the  district,  and  I  could  have  beaten 
three  more  if  they  had  dared  to  run 
against  me.'  " 

David  Wallace  served  but  one  term  in 
Congress,  from  the  Indianapolis  district, 

after  having  served  six  years  as  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor and  three  years  as  Gov- 
ernor. He  was  denied  a  re-election  to  the 
Twenty-eighth  Congress.  According  to 
Woollen,  "Governor  Wallace  was  not  a 
money-making  and  money-getting  man. 
He  took  more  pleasure  in  filling  his  mind 
with  knowledge  than  in  filling  his  pockets 
with  money.  He  entered  into  a  business 
venture  at  Fort  Wayne,  which,  proving 
unfortunate,  cost  him  his  entire  estate. 
One  day,  while  sitting  in  his  yard  talking 
with  his  eldest  son,  the  sheriff  came  with 
an  execution  which  he  sought  to  levy  upon 
the  Governor's  property.  After  some 
parleying  the  sheriff  left,  and  the  Gov- 
ernor, addressing  his  son,  said:  'William, 
I  want  you  to  remember  that  it  will  be  a 
good  deal  better  to  have  a  few  thousand 
dollars  laid  away  for  old  age  than  to  have 
been  the  Governor  of  the  State  or  a  mem- 
ber of  Congress.'  " 

Henry  Smith  Lane  was  a  native  of 
Kentucky,  served  in  the  State  Senate, 
filled  the  unexpired  term  of  Tilghman  A. 
Howard  in  Congress,  was  re-elected,  and 
served  in  all  from  December  7,  1840,  to 
March  3,  1843.  He  was  strongly  in  favor 
of  the  Mexican  war,  in  which  he  served 
as  lieutenant-colonel  of  an  Indiana  regi- 
ment. He  will  receive  further  attention 
in  subsequent  chapters. 


[Chapter  IX.] 



PNDER  the  constitution  of  1816 
Representatives  in  the  State 
Legislature  were  elected  an- 
nually, for  one  year;  Senators 
for  three  years.  The  county  of 
JeiTerson,  of  which  Madison 
then  was  and  still  is  the  county 
trongly  Whig.  In  those  days 
strife  was  easily  engendered. 
The  Whigs  put  in  nomination  for  State 
Senator  a  rigid  Sabbatarian  who  opposed 
Sunday  mails.  Assuming  that  the  Demo- 
crats would  not  have  the  temerity  to  place 
a  candidate  of  their  own  in  the  field,  a 
more  liberal  faction  of  the  Whig  party 
trotted  out  a  candidate  of  their  way  of 
thinking  to  oppose  the  regular  nominee. 
Espying  a  fine  opportunity  to  slip  in  be- 
tween these  two  Whig  candidates,  Jesse 
D.  Bright  entered  the  race  and  was  tri- 
umphantly elected.  He  was  a  strong 
character,  a  man  of  affairs,  a  superb 
judge  of  human  nature  and  an  excellent 
mixer.  He  had  served  two  years  as  Sen- 
ator when  he  was  nominated  by  the  De- 
mocracy for  Lieutenant-Governor  and 
after  an  animated  campaign  elected  by  a 
plurality  exceeding  four  thousand.  He 
made  an  excellent  presiding  officer  and  by 
his  courtesy  and  fairness  greatly  en- 
deared himself  to  members  of  the  General 

Previous  to  his  election  to  these  posi- 
tions he  had  served  acceptably  as  Pro- 
bate Judge  of  Jefferson  County  and  as 
United  States  Marshal  for  the  State  of  In- 
diana. In  the  latter  position  he  was 
afforded  opportunity  to  form  many 
acquaintances  throughout  the  State.  This 
doubtless  contributed  largely  to  his  sub- 
sequent nomination  and  election  to  the 
office  of  Lieutenant-Governor. 

When  the  term  of  Albert  S.  White  as 
United  State  Senator  was  about  to  expire, 
in  1845,  Governor  Whitcomb  let  it  become 
known  that  he  would  greatly  appreciate 
the  honor  of  an  election  to  that  high  office. 
But  the  Lieutenant-Governor  was  a  bet- 
ter politician  than  the  Chief  Executive. 
So  Bright  carried  away  the  honors,  and 
the  Governor  had  to  defer  his  Senatorial 
aspirations  until  1849,  when  the  expira- 
tion of  Edward  A.  Hannegan's  term  made 
it  possible  for  Whitcomb  to  step  from  the 
gubernatorial  chair  into  the  seat  then 
about  to  be  vacated  by  the  man  who  as 
a  "dark  horse"  snatched  away  the  Sen- 
atorial honors  from  Tilghman  A.  Howard 
in  1843. 

Though  Bright  had  made  himself  quite 
solid  with  the  party  managers,  opposition 
to  his  re-election  developed  in  1850. 
Robert  Dale  Owen,  one  of  the  ablest  men 
in  the  State,  had  become  an  avowed  can- 
didate for  the  succession.  Charges  were 
openly  made  that  Bright  sought  to  secure 
a  re-election  by  bribery.  He  heard  of  it 
and  hastened  on  to  Indianapolis  to  defend 
himself.  In  an  interview  with  Mr.  Owen 
he  easily  proved  his  innocence  of  the 
charge  preferred  against  him.  Owen 
withdrew  from  the  race  and  Bright  was 
re-elected  without  further  contest. 

Though  an  intense  partisan.  Bright 
sustained  friendly  relations  with  Henry 
Clay.  On  some  public  measures  these  two 
Senators  agreed  and  co-operated.  And 
Bright  stood  high  in  the  Senate.  This 
was  made  manifest  when,  in  1853,  upon 
the  death  of  Vice-President  King,  the  In- 
diana Senator  was  elected  President  pro 
tempore.  This  position  he  filled  creditably 
until  John  C.  Breckinridge  was  installed 
as  Vice-President  in  1857.    While  presid- 



ing  officer  of  the  Senate  Mr.  Bright  re- 
fused to  assign  three  anti-slavery  Sen- 
ators— Charles  Sumner,  Salmon  P.  Chase 
and  John  P.  Hale — to  any  of  the  standing 
committees,  upon  the  ground  that  "they 
were  not  members  of  any  healthy  political 

The  death  of  Senator  Whitcomb,  after 
serving  a  few  months  more  than  half  of 
his  term,  resulted  in  the  appointment  by 
Governor  Joseph  A.  Wright,  in  the  month 
of  October,  1852,  of  Charles  W.  Cathcart, 
of  Laporte  county,  to  serve  until  the 
Legislature  effected  an  election  for  the  re- 
mainder of  Senator  Whitcomb's  term. 
The  choice  of  the  Legislature  of  1853  fell 
upon  Judge  John  Pettit,  of  Lafayette. 
Dr.  Graham  N.  Fitch,  of  Logansport, 
aspired  to  the  position,  but  the  caucus 
gave  preference  to  Judge  Pettit.  The  lat- 
ter served  from  the  date  of  his  election 
until  March  4,  1855,  when  the  Whitcomb 
term  expired.  The  Legislature  of  1855 
was  unable  to  agree  upon  a  joint  session 
for  the  election  of  a  Senator,  so  for  two 
years  Indiana  had  but  one  representative 
in  the  Upper  House  of  Congress.  The 
Legislature  of  1857,  chosen  in  1856,  was 
Democratic  on  joint  ballot,  the  House  be- 
ing of  that  faith,  while  the  Senate  was 
controlled  by  a  combination  of  Repub- 
licans, Freesoilers,  Know-Nothings  and 
Prohibitionists,  styling  itself  for  the  time 
being  "The  People's  Party." 

Senator  Bright's  second  term  expired 
March  4,  1857.  He  was  desirous  of  being 
made  his  own  successor,  but  had  doubts 
about  the  legality  of  an  election  in  case  a 
joint  session  could  not  be  agreed  upon  by 
the  two  Houses  of  the  General  Assembly. 
The  question  was  submitted  to  a  commit- 
tee of  three  eminent  jurists,  who  gave  it 
as  their  opinion  that  an  election  effected 
by  a  majority  of  the  entire  membership 
of  the  Legislature  would  be  valid. 
Thereupon  it  was  decided  to  proceed  to 
the  election  of  two  Senators — one  to  suc- 
ceed Bright,  the  other  to  fill  the  vacancy 

existing  since  1855.  This  program  was 
carried  out,  and  Bright  and  Fitch  were 
duly  commissioned  by  Governor  Willard. 
The  Legislature  elected  in  1858  was  Re- 
publican. After  a  protracted  debate  the 
election  of  Bright  and  Fitch  was  de- 
clared to  have  been  illegal  and  therefore 
null  and  void.  That  done,  Henry  S.  Lane 
and  William  M.  McCarty  were  chosen  to 
fill  the  two  alleged  vacancies.  These  gen- 
tlemen proceeded  to  Washington  and 
claimed  the  seats  held  by  Bright  and 
Fitch.  Admission  was  refused  Lane  and 
McCarty,  although  three  distinguished 
Democrats — Douglas  of  Illinois,  Mason  of 
Virginia  and  Broderick  of  California — 
voted  that  the  election  of  Bright  and  Fitch 
was  irregular,  illegal  and  therefore  in- 

Bright  had  been  unfriendly  to  Douglas 
for  several  years.  The  action  just  noted 
made  him  hate  the  "Little  Giant"  with  all 
the  intensity  of  his  nature.  He  was  as 
bitter  in  his  enmity  as  he  was  cordial  in 
his  friendship.  In  such  matters  he  toler- 
ated no  middle  ground.  "He  that  is  not 
for  me  is  against  me"  guided  his  action 
throughout  his  political  career.  It  is  this 
that  made  him  the  relentless  foe  of  Gov- 
ernor Joseph  A.  Wright,  and  to  a  some- 
what milder  degree  of  Thomas  A.  Hen- 
dricks, David  Turpie,  Chas.  W.  Cathcart, 
W.  J.  Brown,  W.  A.  Gorman,  Robert  Dale 
Owen,  William  S.  Holman,  and  any  num- 
ber of  other  distinguished  Indiana  Demo- 
crats who  refused  to  conform  to  his 
wishes  or  to  obey  his  commands. 

It  is  said  that  when  President-elect 
James  Buchanan  had  under  consideration 
the  formation  of  his  Cabinet  he  had  Sen- 
ator Bright  in  view  for  Secretary  of 
State.  The  accuracy  of  this  statement 
may  well  be  questioned  for  various  rea- 
sons, chief  of  which  is  that  Buchanan 
finally  chose  for  this  position  General 
Lewis  Cass  of  Michigan,  a  man  of  diplo- 
matic   qualities,    of    conciliatory    disposi- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

tion,  eminent  ability,  and  in  several  re- 
spects the  very  opposite  of  the  Indiana 

The  strained  relations  existing  between 
Senator  Bright  and  Governor  Wright  did 
not  deter  the  Democracy,  in  State  conven- 
tion assembled  at  Indianapolis  in  Febru- 
ary, 1852,  from  giving  these  rival  leaders 
this  unqualified  endorsement: 

"Resolved,  That  we  approve  and  endorse 
the  administration  of  our  present  Gov- 
ernor, Joseph  A.  Wright,  and  that  we 
pledge  to  him,  as  nominee  for  re-election 
in  the  approaching  contest,  our  hearty 

"Resolved,  That  we  have  undiminished 
confidence  in  the  undeviating  and  well- 
tried  Democracy  of  our  distinguished  and 
able  Senators  in  Congress,  James  Whit- 
comb  and  Jesse  D.  Bright,  and  that  we 
fully  endorse  their  senatorial  action." 

At  the  same  convention  General  Joseph 
Lane  was  warmly  endorsed  for  the  Presi- 
dential nomination.  The  delegation  was 
not  formally  instructed  to  vote  for  Lane 
"first,  last  and  all  the  time,"  but  directed 
to  vote  as  a  unit.  The  delegation  voted 
on  thirty  ballots  for  Lane,  then  went  over 
to  Cass.  On  the  thirty-fifth  ballot  a  "dark 
horse"  in  the  person  of  Franklin  Pierce 
was  entered  and  nominated  on  the  forty- 
ninth  ballot. 

In  the  convention  of  1856  these  endorse- 
ments were  accorded  the  Senator  and 

"Resolved,  That  the  Democracy  of  In- 
diana have  undiminished  confidence  in  the 
Hon.  Jesse  D.  Bright,  our  Senator  in  Con- 
gress, and  while  we  are  ready  cheerfully 
and  enthusiastically  to  support  for  the 
presidency  in  the  approaching  election 
whoever  may  be  selected  as  the  candidate 
for  that  office  by  the  Democratic  national 
convention,  from  whatever  quarter  of  the 
Union  he  may  come — if  the  Northwest  is 
honored  with  that  distinction  we  present 
the  name  of  the  Honorable  Jesse  D.  Bright 
to  that  convention,  and  to  the  Democracy 
of  the  Union,  as  a  suitable  candidate  and 
one  whom  the  Democracy  of  Indiana  de- 
light to  honor. 

"Resolved,  That  the  entire  vote  of  the 
delegates  from  this  State  be  cast  as  a  unit 

in  the  national  convention  and  that  a  ma- 
jority of  the  delegation  shall  control  the 
entire  vote  of  the  State. 

"Resolved,  That  we  approve  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  State  government  by 
His  Excellency,  Joseph  A.  Wright,  and 
that  his  integrity,  ability  and  executive 
talents  have  fully  met  the  expectations  of 
the  Democratic  party  of  Indiana,  and  won 
for  him  increased  confidence  and  gratitude 
from  the  people." 

Though  residing  in  Indiana,  Senator 
Bright  owned  a  plantation  over  in  Ken- 
tucky. He  was  a  slave-owner  and  in  full 
accord  with  the  South  on  the  question  of 
slavery.  Fully  aware  that  civil  war  would 
eventuate  in  the  destruction  of  slavery, 
he  counseled  against  secession  and  rebel- 
lion. But  he  could  not  persuade  himself  to 
believe  that  the  Union  could  be  kept  to- 
gether by  coercive  methods.  His  sym- 
pathies being  Southern,  his  affiliations 
naturally  were  with  Southerners.  As  a 
slaveholder  he  was  oppo.sed  to  war  being 
waged  against  the  South.  On  the  first  day 
of  March,  1861,  while  holding  a  seat  in 
the  United  States  Senate,  he  addressed  a 
letter  "To  His  Excellency,  Jefferson  Davis, 
President  of  the  Confederation  of  States," 
in  which  he  recommended  his  friend 
Thomas  Lincoln  of  Texas  to  "favorable 
consideration  as  a  gentleman  of  first  re- 
spectability and  reliable  in  every  respect. 
He  visits  your  capital  mainly  to  dispose  of 
what  he  regards  a  great  improvement  to 
firearms."  The  bearer  of  this  letter  \vas 
arrested  on  his  way  to  the  Confederate 
Capital  with  Senator  Bright's  letter  upon 
his  person.  The  matter  was  brought  to 
the  attention  of  the  Senate;  proceedings 
for  expulsion  were  instituted,  and  after 
afli'ording  ample  opportunity  for  defense, 
the  Senate  expelled  Mr.  Bright  from  the 
seat  he  had  uninterruptedly  occupied  for 
sixteen  years. 

In  the  campaign  of  1860  Senator  Bright 
opposed  both  the  nomination  and  election 
of  Stephen  A.  Douglas  to  the  Presidency. 
While  he  did  not  deem  it  advisable  to  put 
a  State  ticket  in  the  field,  he  did  bring  into 



1  6 

the  race  a  Breckinridge  and  Lane  elector- 
al ticket.  He  entered  upon  a  vigorous 
campaign,  earnestly  appealing  to  his  old- 
time  friends  to  stand  by  him  in  this  crisis. 
Out  of  a  total  vote  of  272,143  he  managed 
to  poll  12,295  for  Breckinridge  and  Lane. 

When  a  Democratic  Legislature  was 
elected  in  1862  Mr.  Bright  did  his  utmost 
to  induce  the  Democrats  of  that  body  to 
"vindicate"  him  with  an  election  to  his 
unexpired  term  in  the  Senate.  This  was 
refused,  the  choice  of  the  party  having 
been  centered  on  Mr.  Hendricks'  running 
mate  in  1860,  David  Turpie.  Responsi- 
bility for  this  "slight"  was  laid  at  the  door 
of  Mr.  Hendricks,  whom  Bright  dubbed 
"Oily  Gammon,"  but  who  nevertheless  re- 
tained for  an  even  quarter  of  a  century 
the  unquestioned  and  uncontested  leader- 
ship of  the  Indiana  Democracy. 

Soon  after  the  infliction  of  this  sore 
disappointment  Mr.  Bright  concluded  to 
shake  the  dust  of  Indiana  off  his  boots 
and  to  take  up  his  residence  on  his  plan- 
tation in  Kentucky.  He  served  two  terms 
in  the  Legislature  of  that  commonwealth 
and  was  at  one  time  talked  of  for  the 
United  States  Senatorship.  He  had  ex- 
tensive interests  in  the  coal  mines  of  West 
Virginia,  which  afforded  him  a  large  in- 
come. In  1874  he  moved  to  Baltimore. 
Broken  down  in  health,  he  died  in  that 
city  of  organic  disease  of  the  heart.  May 
20,  1875. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  war  Mr.  Bright 
appears  to  have  experienced  some  moder- 
ation of  his  ultra  political  views.  He 
earnestly  supported  the  reconciliation 
and  reconstruction  policy  of  President 
Johnson,  and  in  1868  favored  the  nomina- 
tion by  the  Democrats  of  Salmon  P.  Chase 
for  the  Presidency.  In  1869  he  wanted 
the  Democrats  of  the  Indiana  Legislature 
to  enter  into  a  combination  to  elect  one  of 
the  Republican  bolters  to  the  United 
States  Senate,  his  choice  being  a  former 
trusted  lieutenant  of  his.  Senator  James 
Hughes,  who,  during  the  rebellion,  joined 

the  Republican  party.  Like  Clement  L. 
Vallandigham,  of  Ohio,  Jesse  D.  Bright 
believed  in  letting  by-gones  be  by-gones, 
in  gracefully  accepting  the  decree  of  fate, 
and  acquiescing  in  changes  that  could  not 
be  prevented.  In  other  words,  he  believed 
in  the  advisability  of  what  in  Ohio  was 
dubbed  "the  new  departure."  In  a  speech 
delivered  by  Mr.  Hendricks  in  1872  he  ex- 
pressed substantially  the  same  idea  when 
he  said :  "Let  us  turn  our  backs  upon  the 
past  and  look  hopefully  to  the  future." 



In  view  of  the  importance  of  this  case 
and  the  general  misconception  of  the  points 
mvolved  therein,  the  reader  will  doubtless 
appreciate  highly  the  presentation  of  the 
legal  aspect  by  an  authority  of  the  em- 
inence of  Judge  David  Turpie.  As  a 
member  of  the  General  Assembly  of  1859 
he  bore  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  animated 
contest  over  the  proposition  to  annul  the 
action  of  the  preceding  Legislature. 
What  he  had  to  say  on  this  interesting 
subject  is  well  worth  studious  perusal: 

"As  upon  my  former  service  in  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  so  now,  came  again  the 
question  of  the  senatorial  election,  as  the 
first  business  of  the  session  of  1858,  which 
arose  in  the  following  manner:  the  Legis- 
lature of  1855,  chosen  in  1854,  had  the 
duty  imposed  upon  it  of  choosing  a  United 
States  Senator.  But  the  two  houses  of  that 
body  being  of  different  political  faith,  de- 
clined to  go  into  joint  convention  for  that 
purpose.  The  vacancy  caused  by  the  ex- 
piration of  Mr.  Pettit's  term  was  not  filled, 
and  for  two  years  Indiana  had  only  one 
member  in  the  Senate,  Mr.  Jesse  D.  Bright. 
The  Legislature  of  1857,  chosen  in  1856, 
was  Democratic  on  joint  ballot;  of  its  two 
branches  the  House  was  Democratic,  the 
Senate  was  controlled  by  the  opposition. 

"Under  these  circumstances  the  House 
appointed  a  day  for  the  election  of  two 
Senators,  one  to  fill  the  vacancy  existing 
since  1855,  the  other  to  fill  the  vacancy 
about  to  occur  bv  the  expiration  of  Mr. 
Bright's  term.     The  Senate,  as  such,  ig- 



1  (j  -  1  9  1  6 

nored  this  action  of  the  House,  but  the 
Democratic  members  of  that  body  left 
their  seats  in  the  Senate  Chamber,  came 
over  to  the  House  on  the  day  appointed, 
organized  a  joint  convention  and  elected 
Doctor  Graham  N.  Fitch  to  fill  the  existing 
vacancy,  and  Mr.  Jesse  D.  Bright  as  his 
own  successor  for  a  third  term,  each  of 
them  receiving  a  majority  of  all  the  votes 
of  all  the  members  elected  to  the  General 
Assembly.  The  opposition  in  our  State, 
and  especially  that  of  the  Legislature  of 
1858,  including  the  anti-administration 
Democrats,  held  that  the  election  of  Bright 
and  Fitch  so  conducted  was  unconstitu- 
tional and  invalid ;  that  both  vacancies 
were  yet  unfilled  and  that  it  was  their  duty 
to  elect  two  Senators.  They  took  the 
ground  that  the  word  Legislature,  in  the 
clause  of  the  federal  constitution  relating 
to  the  election  of  Senators,  necessarily  im- 
plied the  concuri-ent  action  of  both  Houses 
as  such  to  form  a  lawful  joint  convention. 
We  contended,  on  the  contrary,  that  the 
v.'ord  Legislature  was  not  used  in  any  tech- 
nical sense  in  the  clause  referred  to,  and 
that  the  majority  of  the  whole  number  of 
members  might  legally  form  a  joint  con- 
vention and  elect  Senators  without  such 
concurrent  action.  In  support  of  this  con- 
struction we  referred  to  the  fact  that,  at 
the  time  of  making  the  federal  constitu- 
tion, several  of  the  States,  notably  Penn- 
sylvania, had  a  Legislature  composed  of 
only  one  chamber,  and  that  the  framers  of 
that  instrument,  sitting  in  Philadelphia, 
could  not  possibly  have  contemplated  the 
two  houses  as  such  in  the  use  of  the  term 
Legislature,  but  had  used  it  as  we  still  use 
the  word  magistracy,  to  designate  the  col- 
lective body  of  all  the  persons  in  the  coun- 
ty or  State  who  are  employed  in  the  duty 
of  administering  justice. 

"The  debate  lasted  many  days;  in  the 
House  it  became  quite  warm  and  exciting; 
the  Speaker,  Mr.  Gordon,  left  the  chair  to 
take  part  in  it ;  at  .last  a  vote  was  taken 
and  we  were  beaten.  No  further  resist- 
ance was  offered.  We  kept  our  seats,  took 
no  part  in  the  proceedings,  and  our  col- 
leagues of  the  opposition  held  a  joint  con- 
vention in  which  they  chose  Mr.  Henry  S. 
Lane  and  Mr.  William  M.  McCarty  as  Sen- 
ators from  Indiana  to  fill  the  supposed 
vacancies.  I  wrote  a  full  argument  upon 
the  law  and  facts  of  the  case,  closing  with 
an  earnest  request  for  federal  legislation 
on  this  question,  which  was  seconded  by 

several  of  my  colleagues.  It  seemed  to  be 
a  careless  and  somewhat  dangerous  predic- 
ament that  the  Legislatures  of  the  States 
should  continue  in  many  different  ways  to 
elfict  Senators,  when  Congress  had  the  un- 
doubted right  to  prescribe  by  law  a  uni- 
form method  of  pi'ocedure.  Copies  of 
these  papers  were  sent  to  Senators  of  both 
parties  at  Washington.  Many  letters  were 
received  in  answer.  Some  of  them  ap- 
proved, others  disapproved  the  grounds 
taken  in  argument  in  the  particular  case, 
but  all  concurred  in  the  necessity  of  Con- 
gressional action.  Yet  such  was  the  po- 
litical stress  of  that  troubled  period,  now 
approaching  in  the  history  of  our  country, 
that  it  was  not  until  after  the  conclusion 
of  the  war  that  Congress  enacted  this 
much-needed  legislation.  On  the  26th  of 
July,  1866,  an  act  was  passed  regulating 
the  mode  of  choosing  Senators  by  the  Leg- 
islature. Since  that  time  our  Senators  in 
Indiana  and  elsewhere  have  been  elected 
according  to  its  provisions. 

"Mr.  W.  H.  Seward  and  Mr.  William  G. 
Bayard,  who  were  Senators  in  1858,  Mr. 
Hendricks  and  Mr.  Lane,  who  were  Sena- 
tors in  1866,  have  more  than  once  stated 
in  my  presence  that  it  was  the  Indiana 
case  with  its  non-election  in  1855,  and  its 
contested  election  of  1858,  that  chiefly  im- 
pelled Congress  to  take  its  subsequent  ac- 
tion in  the  premises.  The  United  States 
Senate  held  that  the  election  of  Bright  and 
Fitch  was  valid.  Mr.  Lane  and  Mr.  Mc- 
Carty returned  from  Washington  as  pri- 
vate citizens,  but  they  lost  nothing  in  pub- 
lic estimation  by  their  journey,  nor  was 
the  action  of  our  Legislature  useless  or  un- 
profitable. It  led  to  the  passage  of  a  gen- 
eral law  on  this  subject,  one  of  the 
important  of  our  statutes  at  large. 

"Although  very  firmly  convinced  of  the 
correctness  of  our  opinion  upon  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Senatorial  election,  what  gave 
additional  zeal  to  my  action  was  the  cir- 
cumstance that  Graham  N.  Fitch,  the 
friend  of  my  youth,  was  deeply  interested 
in  the  result.  He  served  in  the  United 
States  Senate  until  March  4,  1861,  taking 
first  rank  in  that  body.  He  was  afterward 
a  colonel  in  the  army;  he  had  the  choice 
of  many  titles,  but  he  preferred  to  be 
called  Doctor.  That  designated  his  favor- 
ite pursuit.  He  was  often  and  long  en- 
gaged in  public  employments  of  the  high- 
est character.  He  entered,  indeed  he  was, 
so  to  speak,  drafted  into  the  work  of  the 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

lecture-room,  taught  as  a  professor  in  the 
medical  schools  of  Indianapolis,  Cincinnati 
and  Chicago,  but  always  returned  to  his 
home — to  his  office  in  Logansport.  To  the 
profession  he  had  given  his  first  love,  and 
it  never  grew  old  or  cold ;  he  continued  in 
it  almost  to  the  day  of  his  death,  not  from 
necessity,  but  from  the  love  he  bore  it. 
His  early  labors  in  the  active  practice  were 
constant  and  toilsome.  He  always  drove 
with  two  horses.  I  have  met  him  more 
than  once,  returning  from  some  distant 
night-call  in  the  country,  seated  in  his 
buggy  fast  asleep,  while  his  faithful  team 
noiselessly  picked  their  way  along  the  cor- 
duroy road,  seeming  loath  to  disturb  the 
slumbers  of  their  master. 

"As  a  public  speaker  Doctor  Fitch  was 
versatile  and  attractive.  When  he  took  the 
stump  he  bade  good-by  to  the  physician. 
There  was  not  the  least  trace  of  the  mate- 
ria medica,  either  in  his  manner  or  utter- 
ances, nothing  of  either  shop  or  sham.  He 
had  read  and  thought  much  upon  the  con- 
stitutional principles  of  our  government, 
and  had  formed  his  opinions  of  the  proper 
mode  of  their  development  by  legislation. 
He  cited  with  eif  ect  and  with  precision  the 
writings  of  Jefferson,  Jackson  and  other 
worthies  of  the  Democratic  school,  but  an 
authority  to  be  cited  by  him  must  always 
be  brief  and  pointed.  A  skillful  disputant, 
he  had  great  powers  of  apprehension  and 
penetration;  he  detected  in  the  twinkling 
of  an  eye  any  infirmity  or  inconsistency 
in  the  position  of  an  opponent,  and  as 
quickly  exposed  it. 

"In  a  prolonged  series  of  joint  discus- 
sions with  Mr.  Schuyler  Colfax  he  defeat- 
ed that  gentleman  for  Congress,  the  only 
defeat  suffered  by  him  in  a  long  political 
career.  During  the  Civil  War  Fitch  was 
authorized  to  raise  a  regiment,  the  Forty- 
sixth  Regiment  of  Indiana  Volunteers, 
which  he  subsequently  commanded  in  the 
field.  His  recruits  were  gathered  by  a 
public  canvass  made  by  him  in  his  own 
and  adjoining  counties.  Several  times  I 
accompanied  him  in  this  canvass  and  spoke 
from  the  same  stand.  His  account  of  the 
beginning,  course  and  termination  of  the 
movement  of  secession  was  the  most  high- 
ly finished  and  thoroughly  wrought-out 
discussion  of  that  topic  I  have  ever  heard. 
His  exhortation  to  the  sons  of  Indiana  in 
behalf  of  the  Union  and  the  constitution 
was  irresistible.     His  regiment  was  rapid- 

ly filled  by  volunteer  enlistments  to  its  full 
complement.  Our  young  men  were  anx- 
ious to  go  with  him." 

The  strong  affection  Judge  Turpie  felt 
for  Dr.  Fitch  was  richly  merited.  It  was 
based  on  sterling  worth.  Friendship  be- 
tween two  such  men  has  in  it  genuineness 
and  sincerity.  Had  it  been  lacking  in 
these  essentials,  it  would  not  have  been 
professed.  Both  had  a  decided  aversion 
to  mere  profession,  to  hollow  pretense. 

Graham  Newell  Fitch  was  bom  in  Le- 
roy,  N.  Y.,  December  5,  1809.  He  studied 
medicine  in  the  medical  college  at  Fair- 
field, N.  Y.,  practiced  in  Logansport,  Ind., 
was  professor  in  Rush  Medical  College  of 
Chicago  from  1844  to  1849 ;  was  presiden- 
tial elector  in  1844,  1848  and  1856 ;  mem- 
ber of  the  Legislature  in  1836  and  1839; 
chosen  member  of  Congress  in  1848  and 
re-elected  in  1850 ;  served  as  United  States 
Senator  four  years,  from  February  4, 
1857,  to  March  4,  1861.  At  the  outbreak 
of  the  rebellion  he  raised  the  Forty-sixth 
Regiment  of  Indiana  Volunteers,  making 
earnest  appeals  to  the  young  men  of  his 
part  of  the  State  to  rally  to  the  defense  of 
the  imperiled  Union  and  the  vindication  of 
the  supremacy  of  governmental  authority. 
He  deplored  secession  and  deprecated  dis- 
sension. His  speeches  breathed  the  spirit 
of  genuine  patriotism  and  contributed 
largely  to  solidifying  public  sentiment  in 
support  of  the  Government.  After  the 
war  he  served  as  a  delegate  to  the  Demo- 
cratic National  Convention  that  in  1868 
nominated  Governor  Horatio  Seymour  for 
President  and  General  Frank  P.  Blair  for 
Vice-President.  He  died  at  Logansport, 
November  29,  1892. 


With  absolute  truthfulness  it  may  be 
said  that  Indiana  fairly  abounded  with 
men  of  unusual  ability  and  eminent  quali- 
fication for  public  service.  This  circum- 
stance confirms  the  view  not  infrequently 




expressed  that  if  a  nation  wants  strong 
and  able  men  there  must  be  trials  and 
tribulations;  even  poverty  can  hardly  be 
considered  a  drawback  in  the  development 
of  individual  stamina.  Certain  it  is  that 
if  thei-e  had  been  three  or  four  times  the 
number  of  important  stations  to  fill  no 
scarcity  of  material  would  have  been 
found  to  exist  to  fill  them  all,  and  fill  them 

John  Pettit  came  within  this  category. 
Born  in  Sacketts  Harbor,  N.  Y.,  June  24, 
1807,  he  fitted  himself  for  the  law,  and 
after  admission  to  the  bar,  acted  upon 
Horace  Greeley's  advice:  "Go  West, 
young  man,  and  grow  up  with  the  coun- 
try." He  located  in  Lafayette,  Ind.,  where 
he  began  practice  in  1838.  His  public 
career  began  with  two  terms  in  the  Legis- 
lature.    He  was  appointed  United  States 

District  Attorney,  and  from  that  position 
was  advanced  to  three  terms  in  Congress, 
serving  continuously  from  March  4,  1843, 
to  March  3.  1849.  In  1850  he  was  chosen 
a  delegate  to  the  constitutional  convention 
and  helped  to  frame  the  present  constitu- 
tion. As  an  elector  he  helped  to  cast  In- 
diana's vote  for  Pierce  and  King  in  1852, 
and  the  following  year  he  was  elected 
United  States  Senator  to  fill  the  latter  part 
of  Whitcomb's  unexpired  term.  During 
the  troublous  days  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
fight  he  was  appointed  Chief  Justice  of 
the  United  States  courts  in  Kansas.  After 
some  years  of  release  from  public  life  he 
was,  in  1870,  elected  a  member  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  Indiana,  which  position 
he  filled  with  marked  ability.  He  died  at 
Lafayette,  January  17,  1877.  Judge  Pettit 
was  a  big  man,  physically  as  well  as  men- 


[Chapter  X.] 

IN  1846 

VENTS   of  magnitude,   of   tre- 

Q^  mendous  importance,  followed 
I  one  another  in  quick  succession 
I  since  the  election  and  inaugura- 
tion of  President  Polk.  Per- 
sons who,  during  the  campaign 
of  1844,  derisively  asked,  "Who 
the  deuce  is  James  K.  Polk?"  had  their 
minds  disabused  as  to  his  qualification 
and  fitness  for  the  high  office  to  which  he 
was  chosen  over  the  gifted,  eloquent  and 
idolized  Henry  Clay.  Though  nominated 
as  a  "dark  horse,"  James  K.  Polk  had 
made  an  enviable  record,  as  member  of 
Congress  from  1825  to  1839,  as  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means,  as 
Speaker  of  the  House  during  a  most  ex- 
citing period  of  federal  legislation,  and  as 
Governor  of  Tennessee.  His  inaugural  ad- 
dress, replete  with  sound  sentiment,  strong 
common  sense,  lofty  patriotism,  and  enun- 
ciation of  high  purposes,  was  read  with 
amazement  by  those  who  had  sought  to 
belittle  him  and  with  satisfaction  and  su- 
preme pleasure  by  those  who  believed  him 
to  be  worthy  of  filling  the  chair  vacated 
eight  years  before  by  that  other  sturdy 
Tennesseean,  Andrew  Jackson. 

The  tariff",  as  will  be  remembered,  was 
one  of  the  main  issues  in  the  campaign  of 
1844.  Up  to  this  time  no  clearer  or  more 
forceful  exposition  of  the  real  Democratic 
position  on  that  question  had  been  made 
by  any  public  man  authorized  to  speak  for 
the  party  than  that  set  forth  in  President 
Polk's  inaugural  address.  In  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  views  therein  expressed  were 
subsequently  made  the  basis  of  the 
"Walker  tariff,"  some  extracts  from  the 
Polk  inaugural  address  will  be  found  both 
interesting  and  instructive.  Note  the  sim- 
plicity, clearness  and  vigor  of  this  elucida- 
tion of  the  Government's  authority  to  levy 
taxes  upon  imports : 

"One  of  the  difficulties  which  we  have 
had  to  encounter  in  the  practical  adminis- 
tration of  the  Government  consists  in  the 
adjustment  of  our  revenue  laws  and  the 
levy  of  the  taxes  necessary  for  the  sup- 
port of  Government.  In  the  general 
proposition  that  no  more  money  shall  be 
collected  than  the  necessities  of  an  eco- 
nomical administration  shall  require  all 
parties  seem  to  acquiesce.  Nor  does  there 
seem  to  be  any  material  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  absence  of  right  in  the 
Government  to  tax  one  section  of  country, 
or  one  class  of  citizens,  or  one  occupation, 
for  the  mere  profit  of  another.  'Justice 
and  sound  policy  forbid  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment to  foster  one  branch  of  industry 
to  the  detriment  of  another,  or  to  cherish 
the  interests  of  one  portion  to  the  injury 
of  another  portion  of  our  common  coun- 
try.' I  have  heretofore  declared  to  my 
fellow-citizens  that  'in  my  judgment  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  Government  to  extend,  as 
far  as  it  may  be  practicable  to  do  so,  by 
its  revenue  laws  and  all  other  means 
within  its  power,  fair  and  just  protection 
to  all  the  great  interests  of  the  whole 
Union,  embracing  agriculture,  manufac- 
tures, the  mechanic  arts,  commerce,  and 
navigation.'  I  have  also  declared  my  opin- 
ion to  be  'in  favor  of  a  tariff  for  revenue,' 
and  that  'in  adjusting  the  details  of  such 
a  tariff  I  have  sanctioned  such  moderate 
discriminating  duties  as  would  produce 
the  amount  of  revenue  needed  and  at  the 
same  time  afford  reasonable  incidental 
lirotection  to  our  home  industry,'  and  that 
I  was  'opposed  to  a  tariff  for  protection 
merely,  and  not  for  revenue.' 

"The  power  'to  lay  and  collect  taxes, 
duties,  imposts  and  excises'  was  an  indis- 
pensable one  to  be  conferred  on  the  Fed- 
eral Government,  which  without  it  would 
possess  no  means  of  providing  for  its  own 
support.  In  executing  this  power  by 
levying  a  tariff  of  duties  for  the  support 
of  Government,  the  raising  of  revenue 
should  be  the  object  and  protectioji  the 
incident.  To  reverse  this  principle  and 
make  protection  the  object  and  revenue 
the  incident  would  be  to  inflict  manifest 
injustice  upon  all  other  than  the  protected 



interests.  In  levying  duties  for  revenue 
it  is  doubtless  proper  to  make  such  dis- 
criminations within  the  revenue  principle 
as  will  afford  incidental  protection  to  our 
home  interests.  Within  the  revenue  limit 
there  is  a  discretion  to  discriminate;  be- 
yond that  limit  the  rightful  exercise  of 
the  power  is  not  conceded.  The  incidental 
protection  afforded  to  our  home  interests 
by  discriminations  within  the  revenue 
range  it  is  believed  will  be  ample.  In 
making  discriminations  all  our  home  in- 
terests should  as  far  as  practicable  be 
equally  protected.  The  largest  portion  of 
our  people  are  agriculturists.  Others  are 
employed  in  manufactures,  commerce, 
navigation  and  the  mechanic  arts.  They 
are  all  engaged  in  their  respective  pur- 
suits, arid  their  joint  labors  constitute  the 
national  or  home  industry.  To  tax  one 
branch  of  this  home  industry  for  the 
benefit  of  another  would  be  unjust.  No 
one  of  these  interests  can  rightfully  claim 
an  advantage  over  the  others,  or  to  be  en- 
riched by  impoverishing  the  others.  All 
are  equally  entitled  to  the  fostering  care 
and  protection  of  the  Government.  In  ex- 
ercising a  sound  discretion  in  levying  dis- 
criminating duties  within  the  limit  pre- 
scribed, care  should  be  taken  that  it  be 
done  in  a  manner  not  to  benefit  the 
wealthy  few  at  the  expense  of  the  toiling 
millions  by  taxing  lowest  the  luxuries  of 
life,  or  articles  of  superior  quality  and  high 
price,  which  can  only  be  consumed  by  the 
wealthy,  and  highest  the  necessaries  of 
life,  or  articles  of  coarse  quality  and  low 
price,  which  the  poor  and  great  mass  of 
our  people  must  consume.  The  burdens 
of  government  should  as  far  as  practicable 
be  distributed  justly  and  equally  among 
all  classes  of  our  population.  These  gen- 
eral views,  long  entertained  on  this  sub- 
ject, I  have  deemed  it  proper  to  reiterate. 
It  is  a  subject  upon  which  conflicting  in- 
terests of  sections  and  occupations  are 
supposed  to  exist,  and  a  spirit  of  mutual 
concession  and  compromise  in  adjusting 
its  details  should  be  cherished  by  every 
part  of  our  widespread  country  as  the 
only  means  of  preserving  hai-mony  and  a 
cheerful  acquiescence  of  all  in  the  opera- 
tion of  our  revenue  laws.  Our  patriotic 
citizens  in  every  part  of  the  Union  will 
readily  submit  to  the  payment  of  such 
taxes  as  shall  be  needed  for  the  support 
of  their   Government,   whether   in   peace 

or  in  war,  if  they  are  so  levied  as  to  dis- 
tribute the  burdens  as  equally  as  possible 
among  them." 

Whatever  conflict  of  opinion  there  may 
exist  with  reference  to  federal  taxation, 
there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  views 
set  forth  in  the  foregoing  extracts  always 
having  served  as  a  guidance  to  Democratic 
legislation  in  framing  laws  to  raise  reve- 
nue for  carrying  on  the  machinery  of  the 
general  government. 

The  public  mind  during  this  time  was 
largely  engrossed  with  "burning  ques- 
tions" relating  to  the  Mexican  war,  the 
annexation  of  Texas,  the  Oregon  dispute, 
etc.  Opinions  differed  widely.  In  regard 
to  Mexico  and  Texas,  the  slavery  question 
became  an  important  factor.  Those  who 
were  radically  opposed  to  the  opening  of 
any  more  slave  territory  were  irreconcil- 
ably against  the  annexation  of  Texas. 
Those  who  Avere  content  with  the  policy  of 
admitting  into  the  Union  territories  in 
pairs,  one  with  slavery  and  the  other  with- 
out, generally  favored  the  annexation  of 
Texas  and  waging  war  upon  Mexico  for  a 
variety  of  wrongs  and  outrages  perpe- 
trated by  the  Mexicans.  In  Indiana  so 
prominent  a  Whig  leader  as  Henry  S. 
Lane,  who  in  later  years  (1856)  presided 
over  the  first  national  convention  of  the 
newly  organized  Republican  party  and 
who  in  1860  was  chosen  Governor,  was  not 
only  an  earnest  and  enthusiastic  champion 
of  the  war  against  Mexico,  but  became  ac- 
tively engaged  in  the  enlistment  of  volun- 
teers. In  his  speeches,  made  to  arouse  the 
war  spirit  of  Indiana,  he  bitterly  attacked 
the  Whig  leaders  who  opposed  the  Mexican 
war.  He  personally  organized  a  company, 
was  made  major  of  the  regiment  of  which 
his  company  constituted  a  part,  was  sub- 
sequently promoted  to  the  lieutenant- 
colonelcy,  and  served  gallantly  to  the  end 
of  his  regiment's  enlistment.  In  Ohio,  on 
the  other  hand,  many  of  the  Whig  leaders 
were  violently  opposed  to  the  war  with 
Mexico.  The  foremost  among  them, 
Thomas  Corwin,  for  many  years  a  distin- 


1  8  1 

19  16 

guished  member  of  Congress  and  several 
limes  elected  Governor  of  that  Common- 
wealth, vehemently  opposed  and  bitterly 
denounced  the  Mexican  war.  Elected  to 
the  United  States  Senate  in  1844,  and 
noted  for  his  eloquence  and  power  of 
oratory,  he  created  a  sensation  by  deliver- 
ing a  speech  on  the  Mexican  war  question 
in  the  course  of  which  he  exclaimed:  "If 
I  were  a  Mexican  as  I  am  an  American,  I 
would  welcome  you  with  bloody  hands  to 
hospitable  graves."  This  unpatriotic  dec- 
laration was  deprecated  by  many  of  his 
friends  and  admirers  and  had  the  effect  of 
greatly  diminishing  and  eventually  de- 
stroying the  popularity  he  had  enjoyed  for 
so  many  years. 

Governor  Whitcomb  made  an  excellent 
record  as  chief  executive.  His  persistent, 
well-directed  efforts  to  repair  the  injury 
inflicted  upon  the  State  and  its  credit  by 
the  bungling  and  impracticable  methods 
adopted  under  Whig  administrations  met 
with  high  appreciation.  So,  when  the  time 
came  for  naming  his  successor,  there  was 
no  diversity  of  opinion  in  his  party  as  to 
the  advisability  of  renominating  James 
Whitcomb  for  Governor.  As  his  running 
mate  Paris  C.  Dunning  was  named.  The 
election  in  August  shows  this  result : 


James  Whitcomb,  Democrat 64,104 

Joseph  G.  Marshall,  Whig 60,067 

Stephen  C.  Stephens,  Abolitionist 2,278 

The  official  returns  as  given  in  the  re- 

port of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  184(5 
vary  from  the  above.  The  figures  therein 
given  are : 


James  Whitcomb  63,94.'") 

Joseph  G.  Marshall r,9,93.3 

Stephen   C.   Stevens 2,278 

Thomas  F.  Marshall  (Clark  county  only).  .  71 

Joseph  Hardinp;  (Jay  county  only) 17 


Paris  C.  Dunning,  Democrat 62,808 

Alexander  C.  Stevenson,  Whig .59,132 

Stephen  S.  Harding,  Abolitionist 2,281 

Edward  E.  Moore,  in  his  "A  Century  of 
Indiana,"  bestows  this  well-deserved  trib- 
ute upon  the  recipient  of  the  popular  en- 
dorsement above  recorded:  "It  was  during 
Governor  Whitcomb's  administration  that 
the  compromise  with  the  State's  creditors 
was  arived  at,  whereby  the  Wabash  and 
Erie  Canal,  together  with  the  canal  lands 
granted  by  the  Government,  and  other 
rights  and  franchises,  were  transferred  in 
discharge  of  one-half  of  the  State's  indebt- 
edness, and  new  bonds,  at  a  lower  rate  of 
interest,  issued  for  the  remaining  half. 
With  this  settlement  confidence  was  re- 
stored, and  the  panic  having  spent  its 
force,  prosperity  began  gradually  to  re- 

December  27,  1848,  Governor  Whitcomb 
was  elected  a  Senator  of  the  United  States. 
He  thereupon  resigned  as  Governor  and 
was  succeeded  by  Paris  C.  Dunning,  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor, who  served  as  Governor 
during  the  remainder  of  the  term.  In 
1849  Joseph  A.  Wright,  Democrat,  was 
elected  Governor. 

[Chapter  XL] 



UEER  circumstances  arose  in 
1848.  The  two  leading  parties, 
Whig  and  Democratic,  came 
near  agreeing,  in  the  main,  on 
the  slavery  question,  although 
the  Whigs  generally  opposed 
the  war  against  Mexico  and 
were  anything  but  pleased  over  the  an- 
nexation of  Texas.  The  campaign  was  a 
queer  one  in  this,  that  the  successful 
aspirant  to  the  Presidency  was  a  slave- 
holder and  that  whatever  fame  attached 
to  his  name  was  acquired  in  the  Mexican 
war,  which  most  of  those  who  voted  for 
him,  especially  in  the  North,  had  bitterly 

The  annexation  of  Texas  had  been  ap- 
proved by  President  Tyler  shortly  before 
the  inauguration  of  President  Polk.  It 
was  an  open  secret  that  one  of  the  pur- 
poses of  the  war  against  Mexico  was  to 
get  a  slice  of  that  country  with  a  view  to 
making  slave  territory  thereof.  In  annex- 
ing Texas  a  stipulation  was  incorporated 
into  the  treaty  that  the  "Lone  Star  State" 
might  be  cut  up  into  five  separate  and  dis- 
tinct States.  Had  this  program  been  car- 
ried fully  into  effect,  the  slave  power  in 
the  Union  would  have  been  largely  in- 
creased. But  it  wasn't.  Texas  was  not 
subdivided,  and  none  of  the  territory  taken 
from  Mexico  became  "consecrated"  to 
slavery.  To  guard  against  the  latter  con- 
tingency an  amendment  to  the  bill  appro- 
priating 822,000,000  for  a  treaty  of  peace 
with  Mexico,  commonly  known  as  the 
"Wilmot,"  was  tacked  on  through 
the  instrumentality  of  such  anti-slavery 
Democrats  as  David  Wilmot  of  Pennsyl- 
vania and  Judge  Brinckerhoff  of  Ohio,  ex- 
pressly forbidding  the  introduction  of 
slavery  in  any  part  of  the  territory  that 

might  be  acquired  from  Mexico.  Though 
this  amendment,  adopted  by  the  House, 
was  never  formally  concurred  in  by  the 
Senate,  it  accomplished  its  purpose  in  an 
indirect  manner.  The  vote  in  the  House 
was  quite  decisive,  83  to  64,  only  three 
Democrats  from  the  non-slave-holding 
States  voting  against  it.  General  Lewis 
Cass,  nominated  for  the  Presidency  by  the 
Democrats  in  1848,  had  declared  himself 
in  favor  of  the  "Wilmot  Proviso,"  but  sub- 
sequently modified  his  opinion  on  that 
subject,  doubtless  with  a  view  to  pro- 
pitiating the  South.  This,  however,  did 
not  prove  helpful  to  him  in  the  campaign. 
The  anti-slavery  Democrats  used  this 
change  of  attitude  effectively  against  him 
by  showing  that  the  "Wilmot  Proviso" 
was  but  a  repetition  of  the  clause  prohibit- 
ing slavery  that  was  put  into  the  ordinance 
of  1787  by  Thomas  Jefferson,  when  the 
Northwestern  Territory  was  ceded  by  Vir- 
ginia to  the  United  States. 

The  Democratic  National  Convention 
met  at  Baltimore  on  the  22d  day  of  May, 
1848.  It  was  presided  over  by  Andrew 
Stevenson  of  Kentucky.  The  two-thirds 
vote  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  175  to  78. 
Complications  had  arisen  in  the  State  of 
New  York  that  resulted  in  sending  two 
delegations  to  the  Baltimore  convention, 
one  dominated  by  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  the 
other  by  Samuel  J.  Tilden.  The  latter 
made  a  strong  representation  of  regular- 
ity; the  Dickinson  delegation  represented 
the  administration  element.  The  ill  feel- 
ing between  the  two  factions,  one  called 
the  "Barnburners,"  the  other  the  "Hunk- 
ers," was  intensified  by  the  circumstance 
that  Senator  Silas  Wright,  dearly  beloved 
by  the  New  York  Democracy,  after  having 
declined    the    nomination    for    the    Vice- 


-19  1 

Presidency  in  1844 — made  to  conciliate 
the  Van  Buren  element  in  1844 — was  sub- 
sequently induced  to  accept  the  nomina- 
tion for  Governor  that  year.  This  ar- 
rangement had  the  effect  of  reconciling 
the  Van  Burenites  and  of  carrying  the 
State  handsomely  for  Polk  and  Dallas  as 
well  as  for  Silas  Wright  for  Governor. 
Two  years  later,  when  put  in  the  field  for 
re-election,  Governor  Wright  met  with 
overAvhelming  defeat.  Responsibility  for 
this  humiliation  was  laid  at  the  door  of 
the  "Hunkers."  Intense  bitterness  was 
engendered,  and  when  the  time  came  for 
appointing  delegates  to  the  national  con- 
vention the  "Barnburners"  had  things 
pretty  much  their  own  way.  But  the 
"Hunkers,"  under  the  skillful  leadership 
of  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  organized  their 
forces  and  appointed  a  contesting  delega- 
tion. They  charged  the  "Barnburners" 
with  being  antagonistic  to  the  established 
policy  of  the  party  with  reference  to  the 
slavery  question  and  as  being  hostile  to 
the  Polk  admini-stration.  The  wrangle 
over  the  disputing  delegations  from  the 
Empire  State  lasted  two  days.  After  an 
intensely  acrimonious  debate  a  motion  was 
finally  adopted  by  a  vote  of  126  to  124  to 
admit  both  delegations,  each  to  cast  half 
of  the  vote  of  the  State.  Though  this  was 
deemed  a  comparative  victory  for  the 
"Barnburners,"  they  withdrew  from  the 
convention,  and  the  "Hunkers"  consider- 
ately declined  to  participate  in  the  further 
deliberations  of  that  body. 

The  leading  candidates  for  the  Presi- 
dential nomination  were  Lewis  Cass  of 
Michigan,  James  Buchanan  of  Pennsyl- 
vania and  Levi  Woodbury  of  New  Hamp- 
shire. A  few  scattering  votes  were  cast 
for  Vice-President  George  M.  Dallas  of 
Pennsylvania,  W.  J.  Worth  of  Texas,  John 
C.  Calhoun  of  South  Carolina  and  W.  0. 
Butler  of  Kentucky.  Necessary  to  a  choice 
on  the  first  and  second  ballots,  168;  on 
the  third  and  fourth,  169.  Cass  received 
125  votes  on  the  first  ballot,  133  on  the 

second,  156  on  the  third,  and  179  on 
the  fourth — ten  more  than  necessary. 
Buchanan's  vote  was  55,  54,  40,  33 ;  Wood- 
bury's, 53,  56,  53,  38.  Cass  was  declared 
duly  nominated  on  the  fourth  ballot, 
whereupon  the  convention  took  a  recess 
until  the  evening  to  place  in  nomination  a 
candidate  for  Vice-President.  William  0. 
Butler  of  Kentucky  was  largely  in  the  lead 
on  the  first  ballot,  receiving  114  votes,  as 
against  74  for  J.  A.  Quitman  of  Missis- 
sippi, 24  for  John  T.  Mason  of  Virginia, 
29  for  William  R.  King  of  Alabama,  13 
for  James  J.  McKay  of  North  Carolina  and 
one  for  Jefferson  Davis  of  Mississippi.  A 
second  ballot  was  ordered  and  Butler  was 
honored  with  an  unanimous  nomination. 

For  a  platform  the  convention  adopted 
a  declaration  of  principles  embodying  (in 
condensed  form)  these  points: 

"  '1.  That  the  American  Democracy 
place  their  trust  in  the  intelligence,  the 
patriotism,  and  the  discriminating  justice 
of  the  American  people.  2.  We  regard 
this  (trust)  as  a  distinctive  feature  of 
our  political  creed  .  .  .  and  contrast 
it  with  the  creed  and  practice  of  fed- 
eralism, under  whatever  name  or  form. 
.  .  .  3.  The  Democratic  party  .  .  . 
renew  and  reassert  before  the  American 
people  the  declaration  of  principles  avowed 
by  them  on  a  former  occasion.'  (Here  fol- 
low resolutions  1,  2,  3  and  4,  of  1840). 

.  .  8.  'No  more  revenue  ought  to  be 
raised  than  is  required  to  defray  the  neces- 
sary expenses  of  the  Government,  and  for 
the  gradual  but  certain  extinction  of  the 
debt.  .  .  .  (Here  follows  resolution  5, 
of  1840,  with  the  addition)  :  "And  that 
the  results  of  Democratic  legislation,  in 
this  and  all  other  financial  measures 
.  have  demonstrated  .  .  .  their 
soundness,  safety  and  utility  in  all  busi- 
ness pursuits."  '  (Here  follow  resolutions 
7,  8  and  9,  of  1840,  and  10  and  11,  of 
1844).  15,  16  and  17.  Justify  the  war 
with  Mexico,  and  compliments  the  army 
for  its  service  therein.  18.  Tenders  fra- 
ternal congratulations  to  the  National 
Convention  of  the  Republic  of  France.  19. 
Declares  the  duty  of  the  Democratic  party 
'to  sustain  and  advance  among  us  consti- 
tutional liberty,  equality  and  fraternity, 
by   continuing   to   resist   all   monopolies.' 



.  .  .  20.  Orders  a  copy  of  these  reso- 
lutions to  be  forwarded  to  the  French  Re- 
public. 21.  Recapitulates  the  chief 
measures  of  Polk's  administration  and  de- 
clares that  'it  would  be  a  fatal  error  to 
weaken  the  bands  of  a  political  organiza- 
tion by  which  these  great  reforms  have 
been  achieved,  and  risk  them  in  the  hands 
of  their  known  adversaries.'  .  .  .  22. 
Compliments  and  congratulates  President 
Polk.  23.  Presents  Lewis  Cass  as  can- 

When  the  convention  adjourned  the  be- 
lief among  delegates  was  quite  general 
that  the  New  York  trouble  would  be 
adjusted  somehow,  as  it  was  four  years 
before.  Their  hopeful  conjectures  were, 
however,  doomed  to  disappointment.  To 
the  more  thoughtful  ones  among  the  dele- 
gates the  signs  of  the  times  were  ominous. 
The  bitterness  of  the  dispute  between  the 
New  York  factions  had  filled  their  minds 
with  apprehension  of  dire  results. 


Democratic  troubles  had  not  afforded 
much  encouragement  to  the  Whig  leaders 
when  they  turned  their  attention  to  the 
nomination  of  a  Presidential  ticket.  They 
recognized  in  General  Cass  a  man  of  high 
character,  of  inflexible  integrity,  and  of 
distinguished  ability.  He  had  manifested 
(jualities  of  both  leadership  and  statesman- 
ship that  at  once  rendered  his  candidacy 
formidable  and  assuring.  As  astute  ob- 
servers the  Whig  leaders  realized  that 
their  own  party  was  in  a  dilemma.  Presi- 
dential timber  in  their  ranks  had  become 
scarce  for  the  time  being.  Daniel  Webster 
was  no  longer  considered  an  available 
quantity.  By  reason  of  his  equivocal  atti- 
tude on  some  of  the  "burning  issues"  of 
that  period  Henry  Clay  had  forfeited  the 
support  of  many  of  his  former  ardent  ad- 
mirers. He  still  had  a  strong  hold  upon 
popular  affection,  but  his  repeated  failures 
in  Presidential  races  awakened  doubts  in 
the  minds  of  even  his  most  devoted  fol- 
lowers as  to  his  further  availability.     No 

one  in  the  North  had  risen  to  prominence 
and  distinction  to  be  seriously  considered 
in  connection  with  a  Presidential  nomina- 
tion. General  Winfield  Scott  had  some 
support,  but  he  was  adjudged  too  "fussy" 
to  be  made  a  safe  standard-bearer.  After 
many  earnest  consultations  the  conclusion 
seems  to  have  been  reached  that  the  "man 
of  the  hour"  was  General  Zachary  Taylor 
of  Louisiana — "Old  Rough  and  Ready" 
his  adherents  fondly  called  him.  It  was 
freely  admitted,  however,  that  he  was  not 
without  flaws.  He  was  not  a  man  of  con- 
spicuous ability ;  he  had  no  claim  to  large 
civic  experience ;  no  one  pretended  that  he 
was  on  terms  of  intimacy  with  statesman- 
ship. The  only  tangible  argument  in  his 
favor  was  that  he  had  made  a  creditable 
record  as  commander  of  the  United  States 
forces  in  subduing  the  Mexicans.  At  the 
same  time  they  were  confronted  with  the 
fact  that  the  opportunity  then  to  distin- 
guish himself  emanated  from  Democratic 
authority  and  favoritism  by  being  assigned 
to  chief  command  in  preference  to  Gen- 
eral Scott.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fact 
that  he  was  a  slaveholder  and  wholly  with- 
out a  political  record  made  the  anti-slavery 
men  in  the  party  feel  dubious  as  to  the  ad- 
visability of  making  him  the  nominee  of  a 
party  that  had  all  along  denounced  as  un- 
warranted and  unjustifiable  the  war  upon 
Mexico.  Then  the  only  assurance  any  one 
had  that  Taylor  even  considered  himself 
a  member  of  the  Whig  party  was  the  some- 
what vague  declaration  that  if  he  had 
voted  at  the  election  in  1844  his  ballot 
would  have  been  cast  for  the  Whig  nom- 
inee, Henry  Clay.  Several  attempts  were 
made  in  the  loi'm  of  resolutions  to  bind 
those  who  had  the  Taylor  interests  in  cus- 
tody to  something  definite,  but  all  motions 
and  resolutions  tending  in  that  direction 
were  promptly,  arbitrarily  and  auto- 
cratically ruled  out  of  order  by  the  pi-esid- 
ing  officer  of  the  convention,  ex-Governor 
John  M.  Morehead  of  North  Carolina. 
The  convention  met  in  the  city  of  Phila- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

delphia  June  7,  in  what  was  then  known 
as  Chinese  Hall.  All  the  States  except 
Texas  were  represented.  After  a  good 
deal  of  parleying  and  sparring  a  pledge 
was  finally  obtained  from  the  leaders  of 
the  Taylor  element  that  if  not  nominated 
by  this  convention  he  would  not  be  the 
candidate  of  any  other  party  and  that  he 
would  support  the  Whig  ticket.  Upon 
final  assurances  being  given  by  a  formid- 
able array  of  Southern  delegates  that  Tay- 
lor would  accept  the  nomination,  would 
abide  by  the  decision  of  the  party,  and 
that  he  could  safely  be  trusted  as  an  ex- 
ponent of  the  Whig  party,  the  hero  of 
the  Mexican  war  was  nominated  for  the 
Presidency  on  the  fourth  ballot.  He  had 
111  votes  on  the  first  ballot,  118  on  the 
second,  133  on  the  third,  and  171  on  the 
fourth.  Henry  Clay  started  out  with  97, 
dropped  to  86  on  the  second,  74  on  the 
third,  and  to  32  on  the  final  ballot.  Win- 
field  Scott  started  with  43,  rose  to  49  on 
the  second  ballot,  to  54  on  the  third,  and 
to  63  on  the  fourth  and  last.  Daniel  Web- 
ster's vote  was  22,  22,  17,  14.  The  Taylor- 
ites  were  considerably  chagrined  over 
their  inability  to  secure  the  adoption  of  a 
resolution  to  make  the  nomination  unani- 
mous, but  some  of  the  New  England  and 
Ohio  delegates  expressed  themselves  so 
emphatically  against  such  approval  of  an 
unsatisfactory  nomination  that  the  at- 
tempt had  to  be  abandoned.  These  dele- 
gates subsequently  identified  themselves 
with  the  Van  Buren  Freesoil  movement, 
thereby  (unwittingly  and  indirectly) 
bringing  about  the  election  of  the  very 
man  whose  nomination  they  refused  to 
permit  to  be  made  unanimous.  It  was  Van 
Buren's  candidacy  that  made  possible 
Zachary  Taylor's  election. 

Among  the  sorest  of  the  participants 
of  the  convention  was  Horace  Greeley, 
sage,  philosopher,  and  editor  of  the  Neiv 
York  Tribune.  This  truckling  to  the  slave 
power  was  galling  to  that  fearless  journal- 
ist and  pronounced  champion  of  the  anti- 

slavery  cause.  When  it  was  determined 
not  to  adopt  a  platform,  by  reason  of  the 
existing  diversity  of  opinion,  and  of  fear 
to  make  any  sort  of  expression  on  the 
slavei-y  question,  Greeley  left  Philadelphia 
in  disgust  and  repaired  to  his  sanctum 
sanctorum  in  New  York  to  indite  a  scath- 
ing denunciation  of  the  cowardliness  of 
the  Whig  convention.  In  terms  character- 
istic of  that  master  journalist  the  nomina- 
tion of  General  Taylor  was  bitterly  de- 
nounced in  the  Tribune.  The  article  was 
headed  "The  Philadelphia  Slaughter- 
house." It  was  a  terrific  arraignment  of 
political  cowardice  and  imbecility  and 
caused  a  tremendous  sensation  for  the  time 
being.  As  time  wore  on  and  the  Van 
Buren  movement  began  to  assume  formid- 
able proportions,  Greeley's  indignation 
subsided  somewhat.  Though  in  hearty 
accord  with  Van  Buren  on  the  slavery 
question,  he  had  fought  him  for  so  many 
years  and  had  denounced  him  so  unspar- 
ingly as  a  scheming  trimmer  and  foxy 
trickster  that  he  could  not  reconcile  him- 
self to  the  thought  of  establishing  political 
fellowship  with  the  Sage  of  Kinderhook. 
By  and  by  he  banished  the  unpleasant 
features  of  the  Philadelphia  convention 
from  his  recollection  and  gradually 
adjusted  himself  to  the  support  of  Taylor 
and  Fillmore.  The  warmth  of  this  sup- 
port was  somewhat  augmented  when  the 
New  York  Whigs  caused  him  to  be  nom- 
inated to  an  unexpired  term  in  Congress. 
The  propriety  and  expediency  of  con- 
ferring this  honor  upon  Horace  Greeley 
was  at  the  election  affirmed  by  a  gratify- 
Ingly  decisive  majority. 

There  was  quite  a  strife  for  the  Vice- 
Presidential  nomination.  Abbott  Law- 
rence, a  New  England  millionaire,  was  an 
active  candidate.  His  chief  if  not  only 
claim  to  such  mark  of  distinction  was  the 
possession  of  a  large-sized  "bar'l"  which 
he  gave  the  managers  to  understand  could 
be  freely  tapped  as  the  emergencies  of  the 
campaign  might  require.     To  the  credit 




of  the  convention  be  it  said  these  dis- 
tinctively commercial  advances  were  re- 
spectfully but  firmly  rejected.  On  the 
second  ballot  the  nomination  for  Vice- 
President  was  conferred  on  Millard  Fill- 
more of  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  He  was  an  ardent 
supporter  of  Henry  Clay,  and  the  conven- 
tion deemed  it  "good  politics"  to  placate 
the  admirers  of  the  eloquent  Kentuckian 
by  nominating  one  of  their  number  for 
second  place.  Fillmore  was  a  much  abler 
man  than  Taylor.  Struggling  with  ad- 
versity in  his  youth,  he  forged  rapidly  to 
the  front  after  he  had  equipped  himself 
for  the  bar  and  had  served  three  years 
as  member  of  the  New  York  Legislature. 
Three  times  he  was  elected  to  Congress, 
declining  a  renomination  to  a  fourth  term. 
He  was  the  Whig  candidate  for  Governor 
in  1844  and  defeated  by  Silas  Wright. 
In  1847  he  was  elected  State  Comptroller. 
Then  followed  his  nomination  and  election 
to  the  Vice-Presidency  of  the  United  States 
and  his  subsequent  accession  to  the  Presi- 

While  a  member  of  Congress,  as  chair- 
man of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee, 
he  framed  the  tariff  of  1842.  This  tariff 
act  is  popularly  assumed  to  have  been 
the  product  of  Henry  Clay,  but  Fillmore 
was  its  real  author.  It  is  interesting  to 
note,  right  here,  what  were  Mr.  Fill- 
more's views  on  the  tariff  after  becoming 
President  upon  the  death  of  Zachary  Tay- 
lor. In  his  first  annual  message,  dated 
December  2,  1850,  President  Fillmore 
made  this  reference  to  the  tariff : 

"A  high  tariff  can  never  be  permanent. 
It  will  cause  dissatisfaction,  and  will  be 
changed.  It  excludes  competition,  and 
thereby  invites  the  investment  of  capital 
in  manufactures  to  such  excess  that  when 
changed  it  brings  distress,  bankruptcy  and 
ruin  upon  all  who  have  been  misled  by 
its  faithless  protection.  What  the  manu- 
facturer wants  is  uniformity  and  per- 
manency, that  he  may  feel  a  confidence 
that  he  is  not  to  be  ruined  by  sudden 
changes.  But  to  make  a  tariff  uniform 
and  permanent  it  is  not  only  necessary 

that  the  laws  should  not  be  altered,  but 
that  the  duty  should  not  fluctuate.  To 
efi'ect  this  all  duties  should  be  specific 
wherever  the  nature  of  the  article  is  such 
as  to  admit  of  it.  Ad  valorem  duties 
fluctuate  with  the  price  and  ofi'er  strong 
temptations  to  fraud  and  perjury.  Spe- 
cific duties,  on  the  contrary,  are  equal  and 
uniform  in  all  ports  and  at  all  times,  and 
offer  a  strong  inducement  to  the  importer 
to  bring  the  best  article,  as  he  pays  no 
more  duty  upon  that  than  upon  one  of 
inferior  quality.  I  therefore  strongly 
recommend  a  modification  of  the  present 
tariff,  which  has  prostrated  some  of  our 
most  important  and  necessary  manufac- 
tures, and  that  specific  duties  be  imposed 
sufficient  to  raise  the  requisite  revenue, 
making  such  discriminations  in  favor  of 
the  industrial  pursuits  of  our  own  coun- 
try as  to  encourage  home  production  with- 
out excluding  foreign  competition.  It  is 
also  important  that  an  unfortunate  pro- 
vision in  the  present  tariff,  which  imposes 
a  much  higher  duty  upon  the  raw  material 
that  enters  into  our  manufactures  than 
upon  the  manufactured  article,  should  be 

The  first  sentence  in  this  quotation 
must  be  startling  to  those  who  have 
labored  under  the  impression  that  the  ad- 
vocates of  a  protective  tariff  in  the  days 
of  Clay,  Webster,  Greeley  and  Kelley  were 
as  rapacious  as  are  the  apologists  for  and 
defenders  of  the  tariff  devised  by  Dingley 
and  later  on  made  more  extortionate  by 
Aldrich  and  Payne.  Ponder  over  these 
declarations:  "A  high  tariff  can  never 
be  permanent.  ...  It  brings  distress, 
bankruptcy  and  ruin  upon  all  who  have 
been  misled  by  its  faithless  pi'otection." 
And  kindly  note,  also,  that  there  is  no 
complaint  whatsoever  in  the  Fillmore 
message  about  the  rates  in  the  Walker 
tariff  of  1846  being  too  low.  The  chief 
contention  made  by  President  Fillmore 
was  that  duties  be  made  specific,  instead 
of  ad  valorem.  On  this  branch  of  the  sub- 
ject there  always  have  been  differences  of 
opinion  among  protectionists  as  well  as 
among  revenue  reformers. 

As  already  stated,  no  platform  was 
adopted  by  the  convention  proper.     But 



at  a  mass  meeting  held  after  the  conven- 
tion had  adjourned  a  sort  of  political 
manifesto  was  promulgated,  of  which  the 
following  is  a  comprehensive  epitome: 

"1.  Ratifies  nomination  of  Zachary 
Taylor  as  President  and  Millard  Fillmore 
as  Vice-President.  2.  Expresses  joy  at 
finding  Mr.  Taylor's  opinions  conservative 
and  faithful  'to  the  great  example  of  for- 
mer days,  and  to  the  principles  of  the 
Constitution  as  administered  by  the  foun- 
ders.' 3.  That  General  Taylor,  in  saying 
that,  had  he  voted  in  1844,  he  would  have 
voted  the  Whig  ticket,  gives  us  assurance 
.  .  .  that  the  heart  that  was  with  us 
then  is  with  us  now.  4.  That  we  look  on 
his  administration  of  the  Government  as 
one  conducive  of  peace,  prosperity  and 
union.  ...  5.  That  standing,  as  the 
Whig  party  does,  on  the  broad  and  firm 
platform  of  the  Constitution,  braced  up 
by  all  its  inviolable  and  sacred  guarantees 
and  compromises  ...  we  are  proud 
to  have  as  the  exponent  of  our  opinions 
one  .  .  .  who  has  said  .  .  .  'that 
he  will  make  Washington's  administration 
his  model.'  6.  Is  occupied  with  a  brief 
recital  of  Taylor's  military  services.  7. 
Asks  united,  zealous,  resolute  co-operation 
of  all  Whigs  'in  behalf  of  our  candidate, 
whom  calumny  cannot  reach,  and  with  re- 
spectful demeanor  to  our  adversaries, 
whose  candidates  have  yet  to  prove  their 
claims  on  the  gratitude  of  the  nation.' 

"1.  'I  reiterate,'  said  Taylor,  'what  I 
have  so  often  said:  I  am  a  Whig.  If 
elected,  I  would  not  be  the  mere  President 
of  a  party.  ...  2.  The  power  given 
by  the  Constitution  to  the  executive  to  in- 
terpose his  veto  is  a  high  conservative 
power,  but  in  my  opinion  should  never  be 
exercised  except  in  cases  of  clear  violation 
of  the  Constitution,  or  manifest  haste  and 
want  of  consideration  by  the  Congress 
.  .  .  3.  Upon  the  subject  of  the  tariff, 
the  currency,  the  improvement  of  our  great 
highways,  rivers,  lakes  and  harbors,  the 
will  of  the  people,  as  expressed  through 
their  representatives  in  Congress,  ought 
to  be  respected  and  carried  out  by  the 
executive.  4.  I  sincerely  rejoice  at  the 
prospect  of  peace.  .  .  .  The  prin- 
ciples of  our  Government,  as  well  as  its 
true  policy,  are  opposed  to  the  subjugation 
of  other  nations  and  the  dismemberment 
of  other  countries  by  conquest.'  " 


After  much  earnest  consultation  the 
"Barnburners'  "  delegation  to  the  Balti- 
more convention  and  others  who  were  in 
sympathy  and  accord  with  them  decided 
upon  holding  a  State  convention  at  Utica, 
N.  Y.,  June  22,  and  inviting  thereto  dele- 
gates from  other  States  for  the  purpose 
of  definitely  determining  what  course  to 
pursue  to  promote  the  cause  in  which  they 
had  enlisted.  Delegates  from  Massachu- 
setts, Connecticut,  Ohio  and  Wisconsin 
attended  this  conference  and  convention. 
After  two  days  of  earnest  deliberation 
Martin  Van  Buren  was  formally  nom- 
inated for  President  and  Senator  Henry 
Dodge  of  Wisconsin  for  Vice-President. 
Senator  Dodge  was  a  native  of  Vincennes, 
Ind.,  had  a  good  deal  to  do  with  Indian 
affairs,  served  as  Territorial  Governor  of 
Wisconsin,  was  three  times  sent  to  Con- 
gress, elected  Governor  in  1846  and 
chosen  United  States  Senator  in  1848.  He 
was  "quite  a  man"  and  would  have  added 
much  strength  to  the  ticket  had  he  con- 
cluded to  "stick."  He  was  in  sympathy 
with  the  Freesoil  movement,  but  believed 
in  party  "regularity"  and  had  a  very  high 
opinion  of  General  Cass.  These  consid- 
erations impelled  him  to  decline  the 
proftered  honor  and  to  give  his  support 
to  Cass  and  Butler.  Van  Buren,  on  the 
other  hand,  readily  accepted  the  nomina- 
tion, which  acceptance  served  as  notice 
to  the  country  at  large  and  the  Democracy 
in  particular  that  the  voice  of  the  anti- 
slavery  men  would  be  heard  and  felt  at 
the  November  election. 

This  movement  grew  rapidly  in  popular 
favor,  so  much  so  that  the  leaders  declared 
it  to  be  expedient  to  convene  a  much  more 
representative  body  to  complete  the  ticket 
of  the  Freesoil  party.  Accordingly  such 
a  gathering  was  held  at  Buffalo,  N.  Y., 
on  the  9th  of  August.  It  was  largely  at- 
tended and  had  accredited  representatives 
from     seventeen     of    the    thirty     States. 


1  9  1 

Charles  Francis  Adams  of  Massachusetts 
presided.  John  P.  Hale  of  New  Hamp- 
shire had  ah-eady  been  nominated  for  the 
Presidency  of  the  Abolition  party.  He 
was  a  United  States  Senator  at  the  time 
and  had  won  a  national  reputation.  There 
was  a  strong  sentiment  in  his  favor  and 
he  developed  remarkable  strength  when 
the  convention  proceeded  to  a  ballot. 
Van  Buren's  nomination  was  favored  by 
159  delegates  and  Hale's  by  129.  Charles 
Francis  Adams  was  by  acclamation  named 
for  Vice-President.  Mr.  Hale  was  so  de- 
lighted over  the  platform  submitted  to 
the  convention  that  immediately  after  its 
adoption  he  formally  withdrew  as  the 
Presidential  nominee  of  the  Abolitionists 
and  throughout  the  campaign  gave  earn- 
est support  to  the  Van  Buren-Adams 

The  platform,  unanimously  and  vocifer- 
ously adopted  by  the  convention,  con- 
sisted of  nineteen  planks,  of  which 
thirteen  related  to  the  slavery  question. 
It  had  evidently  been  prepared  with  great 
care.  Every  sentence  in  it  seems  to  have 
had  painstakmg  consideration.  Persons 
familiar  with  the  writings  of  Samuel  J. 
Tilden  would  at  once  detect  in  the  phrase- 
ology of  this  pronunciamento  the  master 
mind  of  the  Sage  of  Gramercy.  Every 
phase  of  the  slavery  question  was  treated 
with  sublime  courage  and  absolute  fear- 
lessness. In  terms  that  could  neither  be 
misunderstood  nor  misinterpreted  the 
slave  power  was  notified  that  concessions 
to  it  were  already  too  generous  and  that 
henceforth  no  more  slave  territory  could 
be  created  under  the  forms  of  law.  And 
there  wasn't ! 

Epitomized,  this  document  presented  to 
the  consideration  of  the  American  people 
this  declaration  of  principles: 

"Freesoil  Platform  of  1848.— An  elo- 
quent and  impassioned  appeal,  in  a  three- 
fold preamble  and  sixteen  resolutions, 
against  the  extension  of  slavery,  from 
which  the  following  are  brief  extracts :  'A 
common  resolve  to  maintain  the  rights  of 

free  labor  against  the  aggressions  of  the 
slave  power,  and  to  secure  free  soil  to  a 
free  people.'  'We  propose  no  interference 
by  Congress  with  slavery  within  the  limits 
of  anv  State.'  'It  was  the  settled  policy 
of  the  nation  (from  1784  to  1800)  not  to 
extend,  nationalize  or  encourage  .  .  . 
slavery,  and  to  this  policy  .  .  .  the 
Government  ought  to  return.'  'Congress 
has  no  more  power  to  make  a  slave  than 
to  make  a  king.'  'The  only  safe  means  of 
preventing  the  extension  of  slavery  into 
territory  now  free  is  to  prevent  its  ex- 
tension into  such  territory  by  an  act  of 
Congress.'  'We  accept  the  issue  which 
the  slave  power  has  forced  upon  us;  and 
to  their  demand  for  more  slave  States  and 
more  slave  territory,  our  calm  but  final 
answer  is,  no  more  slave  States  and  no 
more  slave  territory.'  'There  must  be  no 
more  compromises  with  slavery;  if  made, 
they  must  be  repealed.'  'We  demand 
cheap  postage  for  the  people.'  'River  and 
harbor  improvements  .  .  .  are  ob- 
jects of  national  concern.'  'The  free  grant 
to  actual  settlers  ...  of  reasonable 
portions  of  the  public  lands,  under  suitable 
limitations,  is  a  wise  and  just  measure  of 
public  policy.'  'Honor  and  patriotism  re- 
quire the  earliest  practical  payment  of  the 
public  debt.'  'We  inscribe  on  our  banner, 
"Free  Soil,  Free  Speech,  Free  Labor  and 
Free  Men,"  and  under  it  we  will  fight  on, 
and  fight  ever,  until  a  triumphant  victory 
shall  reward  our  exertions.'  " 

Several  other  tickets  had  been  placed 
in  the  field,  but  after  the  Buffalo  conven- 
tion no  attention  was  bestowed  upon 
these  offshoots.  It  soon  became  apparent 
that  the  American  people  were  intent  on 
making  their  choice  of  favorites  from  the 
three  tickets  named.  The  Van  Buren 
ticket  rapidly  gained-  in  popular  support. 
At  first  the  Taylor-Fillmore  leaders  feared 
that  more  anti-slavery  Whigs  than  Demo- 
crats might  vote  the  Van  Buren  ticket, 
but  after  any  number  of  prominent  Demo- 
crats had  declared  themselves  for  the 
Buffalo  ticket  the  Taylorites  mustered 
courage  and  gradually  assumed  an  air  of 
confidence.  In  the  main  the  campaign 
was  fairly  decently  conducted.  The 
hottest  partisan  battle  was  fought  in 
Georgia,   where   Alexander   H.   Stephens, 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

who  thirteen  years  later,  in  1861,  was 
made  Vice-President  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy,  led  the  Taylor  forces. 
Stephens  was  physically  diminutive  but 
lion-hearted  as  to  courage.  During  the 
campaign  he  had  a  personal  encounter 
with  Judge  Francis  Cone  of  Greensboro. 
The  difficulty  grew  out  of  a  quarrel  on 
the  Clayton  compromise  of  1848.  Cone 
cut  Stephens  terribly  with  a  knife,  and 
cried:  "Now,  damn  you,  retract,  or  I'll 
cut  your  throat!"  The  bleeding,  almost 
dying  Stephens  cried:  "Never!  Cut!" 
and  grasped  the  swiftly  descending  knife 
blade  in  his  right  hand.  That  hand  never 
again  wrote  plainly.  Few  of  the  wit- 
nesses of  the  affair,  which  occurred  on 
the  piazza  of  Thompson's  Hotel,  Atlanta, 
expected  him  to  recover.  He  did,  how- 
ever, in  time  to  make  a  speech  in  favor 
of  Zachary  Taylor  for  the  Presidency,  the 
carriage  being  drawn  to  the  stand  by  the 
people.  This  affray  doubtless  had  some 
effect  on  the  vote  of  Georgia.  Stephens 
was  dearly  beloved  by  the  people  of  that 
Commonwealth.  Georgia  was  throughout 
the  campaign  in  the  doubtful  column. 
When  the  votes  were  counted  Taylor  had 
2,742  more  than  Cass.  Quite  helpful  to 
the  Taylorites  was  the  result  of  the  State 
election  in  Pennsylvania  in  October.  The 
Keystone  State  had  been  considered  safe 
for  Cass,  but  when  the  Whig  candidate 
for  Governor  carried  it  by  305  majority 
Democratic  confidence  began  to  waver. 
At  the  November  election  Taylor  and 
Fillmore  were  triumphant  in  Pennsyl- 
vania by  a  plurality  of  14,337  and  by  a 
majority  of  3,074  over  both  Cass  and  Van 

Of  the  popular  vote  Taylor  had  1,360,- 
101;  Cass,  1,220,544;  Van  Buren,  291,263. 
Of  the  electoral  vote  Taylor  received  163 ; 
Cass,  127;  Van  Buren,  none.  Of  the  fif- 
teen Southern  States  Taylor  carried  eight ; 
Cass,  seven.  There  were  then  just  as 
many  slave  States  as  free  States — thirty 
in  all.    Of  the  Northern  States  Cass  car- 

ried eight;  Taylor,  seven.  Every  State 
west  of  Pennsylvania — Ohio,  Indiana,  Illi- 
nois, Michigan  and  Wisconsin — went  for 
Cass.  Down  East  Cass  carried  New 
Hampshire  and  Maine — due  to  the  rela- 
tively large  Van  Buren  vote.  Van  Buren's 
strength  was  greatest  in  New  York, 
Massachusetts,  and  Ohio.  In  Massachu- 
setts, New  York  and  Vermont  Van  Buren 
received  more  votes  than  Cass.  Relatively 
the  poorest  showing  made  by  Van  Buren 
was  in  New  Jersey,  where  he  polled  only 
829  votes;  in  Rhode  Island  he  had  730. 
In  the  South  Van  Buren  was  credited  with 
eighty  votes  in  Delaware,  125  in  Mary- 
land, and  nine  in  Virginia.  The  State 
that  divided  its  vote  nearest  equally  was 
Wisconsin,  which  gave  Cass  15,001;  Tay- 
lor, 13,747 ;  Van  Buren,  10,418. 

As  to  the  effect  of  the  election,  it  may 
be  said  to  have  been  nil.  The  only  signifi- 
cance about  it  was  the  vote  cast  for  Van 
Buren  and  the  platform  upon  which  he 
stood.  Not  a  single  slave  territory  was 
thereafter  organized  or  admitted  into  the 
Union.  But  for  twelve  long  years  the 
nation  experienced  the  liveliest  fight  over 
the  slavery  question  that  had  been  wit- 
nessed during  its  entire  existence.  As  for 
the  Whig  party — well,  it  succeeded  in 
electing  its  candidate  for  the  Presidency 
in  1848  by  putting  forth  a  negative  quan- 
tity, a  slaveholder  whose  only  prestige  was 
that  of  having  won  in  the  Mexican  war, 
which  Whigs  had  all  along  denounced  as 
an  outrage  and  a  national  disgrace.  They 
were  unable  to  control  either  house  of 
Congress,  were  literally  snowed  under  in 
the  next  Presidential  contest,  and  saw  the 
party  go  to  pieces  in  1854. 



For  the  purpose  of  organizing  for  the 
Presidential  campaign  of  1848  the  Indiana 
Democracy  met  in  State  convention  at 
Indianapolis  on  historic  Jackson  Day,  the 
8th  of  January.    Hon.  J.  G.  Read  of  Clark 



1  9  1 

officiated  as  temporary  chairman.  A  com- 
mittee on  permanent  orgariization  was 
created.  This  committee  consisted  of  one 
from  each  of  the  ten  Congressional  dis- 
tricts, as  follows: 

A.  L.  Robinson  of  Vanderburg  county, 
J.  S.  Sullivan  of  Clark  county,  S.  F.  Cov- 
ington, Joseph  Leach  of  Union  county, 
Major  Z.  Tannehill  of  Bartholomew  coun- 
ty, John  W.  Cox  of  Morgan,  M.  L.  Roach 
of  Parke  county,  Thomas  Smiley  of  Tip- 
pecanoe county,  J.  J.  Shryock  of  Fulton 
county,  Frank  P.  Randall  of  Allen  county. 

Through  its  chairman,  A.  L.  Robinson, 
this  committee  named  the  following  gen- 
tlemen as  permanent  officers  of  the  con- 
vention : 

President — Ethan  Allen  Brown  of 
Dearborn  county. 

Vice-Presidents — J.  F.  Dufour  of  Switz- 
erland county,  J.  Coates  of  Fountain, 
Francis  Little  of  Bartholomew,  Lot  Day 
of  St.  Joseph,  Major  Z.  Tannehill  of 

Secretaries — J.  P.  Chapman  of  Marion 
county,  Francis  King  of  Wayne,  J.  B.  Hall 
of  Dearborn,  S.  A.  Hall  of  Cass. 

The  State  Central  Committee  for  this 
year's  campaign  consisted  of  Dr.  Living- 
ston Dunlap,  General  David  Reynolds, 
Colonel  James  P.  Drake,  George  A.  Chap- 
man, E.  N.  Skinner,  William  Sullivan  and 
Charles  Mayer. 

For  the  State  at  Large — A.  S.  Burnett 
of  Floyd  county  and  John  U.  Pettit  of 
Wabash.  Contingents:  James  H.  Lane 
of  Dearborn  county  and  Isaac  C.  Elston  of 
Montgomery  county. 


First — James  Lockhart  of  Vanderburg; 
Dr.  William  F.  Sherrod,  Dubois;  E.  R. 
James,  Posey.  Contingents :  Robert  Dale 
Owen,  Posey;  B.  Edmondson,  Gibson. 

Second— E.  G.  English;  H.  Deputy,  Jef- 
ferson; John  Carr,  Jackson.  Contingent: 
J.  H.  Sullivan. 

Third— F.  S.  Dufour,  Switzerland; 
James  P.  Milliken,  Dearborn;  Finley 
Bigger,  Rush.  Contingent:  E.  D.  Crook- 

Fourth — Samuel  E.  Perkins,  Wayne; 
John  S.  Reid,  Union ;  James  Elder,  Wayne. 
Contingent:     James  Osborn,  Union. 

Fifth — J.  P.  Chapman,  Marion;  James 
Blake,  Marion.  Contingent:  F.  Hardin, 

Sixth — John  R.  Jones,  Knox;  R.  W. 
Aiken,  Sullivan;  P.  M.  Parks,  Morgan. 

Seventh — James  M.  Gregg,  Hendricks; 
William  P.  Bryant,  Parke;  C.  T.  Patter, 
son,  Vigo. 

Eighth — Addison  M.  Crane,  Tippe- 
canoe; G.  W.  Lawson,  Fountain;  Captain 
Robert  H.  Milroy,  Carroll.  Contingent: 
Joseph  Ristine,  Montgomery. 

Ninth — Gilbert  Hathaway,  Laporte; 
Samuel  A.  Hall,  Cass.  Contingent:  John 
Bi'ownfield.  St.  Joseph. 

Tenth— Frank  P.  Randall,  Allen;  Sam- 
uel S.  Mickle,  Adams.  Contingent:  Madi- 
son Marsh. 

The  importance  of  naming  an  excep- 
tionally strong  electoral  ticket  seems  to 
have  been  duly  impressed  upon  the  con- 
vention. The  gentlemen  selected  were 
men  of  high  standing  and  of  much  more 
than  local  prominence.  For  electors  for 
the  State  at  large  the  convention  named 
two  men,  one  of  whom  (Mr.  Owen)  had 
already  served  two  terms  in  Congress,  and 
a  presiding  judge  (Mr.  Chamberlain), 
who  later  on  was  elected  to  Congress  in 
1852.  Among  the  district  electors  were 
several  who  had  also  filled  important  pub- 
lic positions.  In  its  entirety  the  electoral 
ticket  was  thus  constituted: 


Robert  Dale  Owen  of  Posey  county. 
Ebenezer   M.   Chamberlain   of   Elkhart 


1.  Nathaniel  Albertson,   Harrison  county. 

2.  Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  Washington. 

3.  William  M.  McCarty,  Franklin. 



-19  1 

4.  Charles  H.  Test,  Wayne. 

5.  James  Ritchie,  Johnson. 

6.  George  W.  Carr,  Lawrence. 

7.  James  M.  Hanna,  Clay. 

8.  Daniel  Mace,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  Graham  N.  Fitch,  Cass. 
10.  Andrew  J.  Harlan,   Grant. 

Heading  the  electoral  ticket,  and  having 
attained  an  enviable  reputation  as  a  force- 
ful public  speaker,  Robert  Dale  Owen 
played  an  important  part  in  this  cam- 
paign. He  was  the  subject  of  vigorous 
attack  by  the  opposition  generally  and  of 
vindictive  denunciation  by  unscrupulous 
partisan  publications.  When  his  critics 
found  themselves  unable  effectively  to 
combat  his  political  philosophy,  they 
sought  to  neutralize  the  force  of  his  argu- 
ment by  branding  him  an  "infidel  lec- 
turer." These  shafts  had,  however,  failed 
utterly  to  disturb  his  equanimity.  He  re- 
called the  fact  that  Thomas  Jefferson  was 
in  his  day  assailed  and  maligned  in  like 
manner  and  that  dismay  fell  upon  the 
heads  of  his  traducers  when  the  illustrious 
author  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
met  their  accusations  with  this  incisive 
rejoinder  and  refutation: 

"As  to  the  calumny  of  Atheism,  I  am 
so  broken  to  calumnies  of  every  kind,  from 
every  department  of  government,  Exec- 
utive, Legislative  and  Judiciary,  and  from 
every  minion  of  theirs  holding  office  or 
seeking  it,  that  I  entirely  disregard  it. 
.  .  .  It  has  been  so  impossible  to  con- 
tradict all  their  lies,  that  I  am  determined 
to  contradict  none;  for  while  I  should  be 
engaged  with  one,  they  would  publish 
'twenty  new  ones. 

"Had  the  doctrines  of  Jesus  been 
preached  always  as  pure  as  they  came 
from  His  lips,  the  whole  civilized  world 
\^ould  now  have  been  Christian. 

"To  the  corruptions  of  Christianity  I 
am  indeed  opposed ;  but  not  to  the  genuine 
precepts  of  Jesus  Himself;  I  am  a  Chris- 
tian in  the  only  sense  He  wished  any  one 
to  be;  sincerely  attached  to  His  doctrines 
in  preference  to  all  others;  ascribing  to 
Himself  every  human  excellence;  and  be- 
lieving he  never  claimed  any  other. 

"The  greatest  of  all  reformers  of  the 
depraved  religion  of  His  own  country  was 

Jesus  of  Nazareth.  Abstracting  what  is 
really  his  from  the  rubbish  in  which  it 
is  buried,  easily  distinguished  by  its 
lustre  from  the  dross  of  His  biographers, 
and  as  separable  from  that  as  the  diamond 
from  the  dunghill,  we  have  the  outlines  of 
a  system  of  the  most  sublime  morality 
which  has  fallen  from  the  lips  of  man; 
outlines  which  it  is  lamentable  He  did  not 
fill  up.  Epictetus  and  Epicurus  give  laws 
for  governing  ourselves,  Jesus  a  supple- 
ment of  the  duties  and  charities  we  owe 
to  others." 

Even  a  character  so  gentle  as  that  of 
the  revered  Abraham  Lincoln  did  not  in 
the  days  of  his  struggles  escape  the  sting 
of  the  tongue  of  vituperation  and  slander. 
Chagrined  over  intimations  and  innu- 
endos  that  he  was  indifferent  and  derelict 
as  to  the  performance  of  religious  service, 
his  great  mind  impelled  his  gentle  heart 
to  unbosom  itself  in  this  soulful  manner: 

"I  have  never  united  myself  to  any 
church  because  I  have  found  difficulty  in 
giving  my  assent  without  mental  reserva- 
tion to  the  long,  complicated  statements 
of  Christian  doctrine  which  characterize 
their  articles  of  belief  and  confessions  of 
faith.  Whenever  any  church  will  inscribe 
over  its  altar  as  its  sole  qualification  for 
membership  the  Savior's  condensed  state- 
ment of  the  substance  of  both  law  and 
gospel,  'Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul, 
and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself,'  that  church  will  I  join  with 
all  my  heart  and  all  my  soul." 

Note  how  happily  this  blends  with  the 
sentiments  expressed  by  Thomas  Jeffer- 

General  Cass  carried  the  State  by  a  plu- 
rality of  4,838.  The  total  vote  cast  was 
152,7,52,  of  which  Cass  received  74,745; 
Taylor,  69,907 ;  Van  Buren,  8,100. 

Though  there  was  a  strong  Van  Buren 
sentiment  in  Indiana,  the  nomination  of 
General  Cass  met  the  approval  and  appro- 
bation of  an  overwhelming  majority  of 
the  Democratic  party.  There  were  sev- 
eral reasons  for  this:  Cass  was  person- 
ally very  popular  in  Indiana.  He  had  re- 
peatedly visited  the  State,  and  on  various 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

occasions    rendered    valuable    service    to  PRESIDENTIAL  VOTE  OF  INDIANA, 

its  people.     This  was  particularly  so  in  1848. 

the   adjustment    of    difficulties    with    the 

Indians.     His   counsel  with   reference  to        Counties.  Cass. 

the  construction  of  public  thoroughfares  Adams  ......... '. '. . ....     '398 

was  deemed  of  incalculable  value.     Then  Blackford 231 

Diown     50.^ 

the  fact  that  he  was  a  Westerner  and  resi-  r.oone  916 

dent  of  an  adjoining  State  weighed  heavily  ggnto"'""'*''^   ^'^78 

in  his  favor.     But  above  all  else  he  was  Clinton  964 

esteemed    as    a    high-minded    gentleman,  (■j-g'^vfo,.^ ^'397 

wise   legislator   and   patriotic   statesman.  Clay   734 

On  the  slavery  question  he  was  in  accord  cass"     ................     829 

with    prevailing    public    sentiment :    con-  Dubois  579 

servative.     This  made  him  acceptable  to  Delaware  ..... ..... ....     694 

the  vast  majority  of  the  party.     The  re-  ^f^^^^^ ^IH 

suit  of  the  November  election  fully  cor-  Dearhom  ...... ...... ..  I'soi 

roborated  the  judgment  formed  by  those  Elkhart 1,050 

who   in   convention   so   earnestly   labored  Fayette   ...............     765 

for  the   nomination   of  General   Cass   on  Floyd 1,154 

.,    ,  .,.  Fountain    1,343 

the  ground  of  availability.  Franklin 1,695 

Among  Van  Buren's  most  earnest  and  oieene  ................     921 

enthusiastic  supporters  was  General  John  c,ibson   802 

TT    /-.  i7  TT    1  i  u  Harrison    1,047 

H.  Cravens  01  Ripley  county,  who  was  a  Hendricks   775 

Whig    presidential    elector    in    1840    and  S°^5'"'^, 5^5 

^     ^  Huntington    463 

who  represented  his  district  in  Congress  Henry  ; 1,005 

from  1841  to  1843  as  a  Whig.    On  account  HaSr. ! ! ! ! .' ! ! ! ! ! !  i.' !     806 

of  his  pronounced  anti-slavery  views  he  Jennings   784 

left    the    Whig    party,    supported    Van  Jl^^loT..'. '.:'.'. '.'.'.: '.'.'.'.'.  I'xni 

Buren   for  the  Presidency,   and  was  the  Johnson  1,114 

Freesoil  candidate  for  Governor  in  1849.  jay  ...................     392 

In  later  years  he  sei-ved  with  distinction  k°ox"^''°   741 

in  the  war  for  the  Union.  Lagrange 636 

^    .      _,      ,  ^,     .  „     ,  Lawrence 1.031 

Ovid  Butler,  as  Chairman  of  the  Fi'ee-  lake  208 

soil  Committee,  issued  the  call  for  a  State  ^fa^rghan 428 

convention  at  Indianapolis  August  3  for  Miami 770 

the  purpose  of  effecting  an  organization  Montgomery'!!!.'!!!!.'!!  L547 

and  naming  delegates  to  the  Buffalo  con-  Morgan    1,029 

mi.  2.^  IT         -n  Monroe 1,084 

vention.     The  same  month  a  Van  Buren  Martin  497 

paper,   called   The  Freesoil  Banner,   was  JJoble""  613 

established  at  Indianapolis  by  W.  B.  Greer  Owen 953 

and  L.   Wallace,   two  young  anti-slavery  orange  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !     961 

men  and  former  Whigs.     In  view  of  the  Posey  1,226 

after  effect  of  the  Van  Buren  movement  Perry '!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !     335 

an   analvsis   of   the   Presidential  vote   of  {'"tnam   1,300 

.,     ,.  ,  .  .„  Parke    1,319 

Indiana,  by  counties,  will  prove  quite  in-  Pulaski 224 

'itriiptivp  Porter 401 

structue.  j^^pl^^    ggg 









































,  423 
































































































Randolph   787 

Rush 1,392 

Shelby 1,414 

Spencer    471 

Switzerland 1,106 

Scott 447 

Sullivan   1,142 

St.  Joseph   667 

Steuben    352 

Tipton 235 

Tippecanoe    1,523 

Union   637 

Vermilion   763 
























Vigo    852 

Vanderburg 667 

Washington    1,643 

Warren 460 

Warrick   862 

Wayne 1,432 

Wabash 739 

White   305 

Wells    416 

Whitley    373 

Cass  over  Taylor— 4,838. 


1  6 






















[Chapter  XII.] 



the  gospel  of  amity  should  be  proclaimed 
on  all  suitable  occasions,  the  writer  feels 
assured  that  the  incorporation  of  this 
lofty  sentiment  into  these  pages  will  be 
pleasing  to  every  reader  of  this  book: 
"In  wandering  through  your  mental  pleas- 
ure grounds,  whenever  you  come  upon  an 
ugly  intruder  of  a  thought  which  might 
bloom  into  some  poisonous  emotion  such 
as  fear,  envy,  hate,  woriy,  remorse,  anger, 
and  the  like,  there  is  only  one  right  way 
to  treat  it.  Pull  it  up  like  a  weed;  drop 
it  upon  the  rubbish  heap  as  promptly  as 
if  it  were  a  stinging  nettle;  and  let  some 
harmonious  thought  grow  in  its  place. 
There  is  no  more  reckless  consumer  of  all 
kinds  of  exuberance  than  the  discordant 
thought,  and  weeding  it  out  saves  such  an 
astonishing  amount  of  eau  de  vie  where- 
with to  water  the  garden  of  joy,  that  with 
it  in  hand  every  man  may  be  his  own  Bur- 

When  the  Democracy  of  Indiana  assem- 
bled in  State  convention  to  nominate  can- 
didates for  Governor  and  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  to  be  elected  in  1849,  Senator 
James  Whitcomb,  twice  elected  as  Gov- 
ernor, was  chosen  to  preside  over  the 
assemblage.  This  was  a  fitting  compli- 
ment to  one  of  the  State's  really  great  and 
good  men,  and  gave  high  promise  of  wis- 
dom guiding  the  action  of  the  convention. 

As  Vice-Presidents  these  sturdy  Demo- 
crats from  the  ten  districts  were  chosen: 

y yi  ARKED  and  pronounced  as  was 

ITL  I"!  the  ill  feeling  between  Senator 
I  li/l  i  ■'^^^^ht  and  Governor  Wright, 
Ht_|_|     each  of  these  distinguished  In- 

'    diana     Democrats    seemed    to 

have  been  able  to  accomplish 
his  main  purpose,  at  least  when 
highest  interests  were  at  stake.  Doubt- 
less Governor  Wright  would  have  been 
delighted  to  have  shortened  the  Senatorial 
career  of  Bright ;  equally  certain  it  is  that 
the  latter  would  have  experienced  un- 
bounded satisfaction  had  it  been  in  his 
power  to  prevent  Joseph  A.  Wright  from 
being  elevated  to  the  Governorship  of  In- 

When  such  rivalries  among  politicians 
of  the  same  affiliation  pass  under  review 
years  after  the  actors  in  these  dramas 
have  passed  from  earth ;  when  cogitations 
are  indulged  in  why  enmities  and  hates 
are  engendered  among  men,  the  thought 
forces  itself  irresistibly  upon  the  mind 
that  after  all  is  done  and  said  strife  and 
contention  are  found  to  be  inseparably 
associated  with  human  efforts.  Attempts 
at  fathoming  the  problem  why  this  ap- 
proaches the  inevitable  must  ever  prove 
abortive,  for  wherever  the  eye  may  be 
turned,  evidence  of  disharmony  is  percept- 
ible here  and  there,  if  not  everywhere.  It 
has  ever  been  thus,  and  unless  humanity 
undergoes  a  radical  change,  bordering  on 
complete  transformation,  it  in  all  proba- 
bility ever  will  be  thus. 

When  men  of  mature  years  become  in- 
volved in  strife  and  contention,  efforts  at 
pacification  or  reconciliation  are  rarely 
appreciated  at  full  value.  But  there  is 
compensation  in  the  preachment  of  the 
doctrine  of  forbearance  and  of  resistance 
to  the  aggressive  spirit  of  revengefulness. 
Thoroughly  imbued  with  the  belief  that 

1.  Gaines  H.  Roberts,  Warrick  county. 

2.  John  L.  Morrison,  Washington. 

3.  George  Berry,  Franklin. 

4.  George  Evans,  Henry. 

5.  Robert  Hankins,  Shelby. 

6.  Col.  Willis  A.  Gorman,  Monroe. 

7.  A.  D.  Billingsley,  Putnam. 

8.  George  H.  G.   Stackhouse,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  Lot  Day,  St.  Joseph. 

10.  Madison  Marsh,  Steuben. 



1  6 

Secretaries — W.  B.  Chase  of  Lafayette ; 
Dr.  E.  W.  H.  Ellis,  editor  of  the  Goshen 
Democrat;  Colonel  William  W.  Tuley  of 
New  Albany,  and  R.  D.  Logan  of  Rush- 

Public  sentiment  had  decided  before 
the  assembling  of  the  convention  that 
Joseph  A.  Wright  of  Parke  county  should 
be  nominated  for  Governor.  The  people 
had  faith  in  him ;  the  people  demanded  his 
nomination.  In  conformity  with  this  de- 
mand Mr.  Wright  was  nominated  amidst 
an  outburst  of  enthusiasm  that  admitted 
of  no  doubt  as  to  his  popularity.  The 
nomination  for  Lieutenant-Governor  was 
in  like  manner  conferred  upon  James  H. 
Lane  of  Dearborn  county. 

The  management  of  the  campaign  for 
Wright  and  Lane  was  intrusted  to  a  State 
central  committee,  which,  in  point  of 
adaptation,  fitness  and  excellence,  had  not 
been  equaled  up  to  that  time.  The  first 
name  on  the  list  was  Albert  G.  Porter  of 
Indianapolis,  who  later  on  served  several 
terms  in  Congress,  and  who  in  1880  was 
elected  Governor  over  Franklin  Landers. 
These  are  the  names  of  the  gentlemen  con- 
stituting the  State  Committee  for  1849 : 
A.  G.  Porter,  Dr.  A.  Gall, 

Daniel  Reynolds,  C.  G.  Werbe, 

Dr.  L.  Dunlap,  N.  Bolton, 

Wm.  H.  Morrison,         Francis  King, 
Geo.  A.  Chapman,         Gen.  J.  P.  Drake. 


Dr.  E.  W.  H.  Ellis  was  for  years  the 
most  active  and  energetic  Democrat  in 
northern  Indiana.  He  was  an  able  writer 
and  a  sagacious  politician.  As  such  he 
wielded  considerable  influence.  His  views 
on  the  slavery  question  were  very  pro- 
nounced and  he  gave  them  vigorous  ex- 
pression through  the  columns  of  his  paper, 
the  Goshen  Democrat,  as  well  as  in  party 
councils.  At  conventions  and  in  party 
caucuses  he  always  commanded  respect 
and  usually  had  with  him  a  formidable  fol- 

Owing  to  the  slow  development  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  State  and  the  long 

start  had  in  populating  southern  Indiana, 
political  power  was  correspondingly  feeble 
in  the  northern  tier  of  counties.  Never- 
theless a  good  deal  of  attention  was  given 
the  northern  part  of  the  State,  largely  on 
account  of  the  cleverness  and  native  ability 
of  the  men  who  were  dominant  in  public 
affairs  north  of  the  Wabash. 

It  so  happened  that  when  the  time  came 
for  nominating  a  successor  to  Governor 
Whitcomb,  southern  Indiana  Democrats, 
who  did  not  look  with  favor  upon  the 
gubernatorial  aspirations  of  Joseph  A. 
Wright  and  James  H.  Lane,  strong  induce- 
ments were  held  out  to  Judge  Ebenezer  M. 
Chamberlain  of  Goshen  to  become  a  candi- 
date for  that  office.  He  was  an  excellent 
man  and  the  Democrats  of  northern  In- 
diana held  him  in  high  esteem.  Accord- 
ingly they  went  to  the  State  convention 
with  high  hopes  and  large  expectations. 
But  it  did  not  take  them  long  to  ascertain 
that  the  southern  Indianians  who  induced 
Judge  Chamberlain  to  become  a  candidate 
were  not  in  position  to  deliver  the  goods. 
Joseph  A.  Wright  was  an  exceptionally 
adroit  politician  and  manipulator.  Jim 
Lane  soon  discovered  that  there  was  no 
chance  for  his  nomination  for  first  place, 
and  going  upon  the  assumption  that  a  half 
loaf  is  better  than  no  bread  at  all,  he 
slipped  under  the  wings  of  the  Wright  fac- 
tion and  gladly  accepted  second  place  on 
the  ticket. 

When  Dr.  Ellis  returned  to  his  sanctum 
sanctorum  at  Goshen  he  took  his  pen  in 
hand  and  formulated  an  editorial  of  a 
column  in  length  in  which  he  unmercifully 
blistered  the  hides  of  the  southern  Indiana 
Democrats  who  had  promised  so  much  and 
did  so  little  to  make  good  their  promises 
and  assurances. 

Only  three  or  four  counties  in  the  entire 
southern  part  of  the  State  gave  any  of 
their  votes  to  Judge  Chamberlain.  Dr. 
Ellis  "ripped  them  wide  open,"  yet  consid- 
erately and  diplomatically  declared  in  his 
vitriolic  pronunciamento  that  the  nominees 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

were  good  men  and  woi-thy  of  Democratic 
support.  Nothing,  he  contended,  could  or 
would  be  gained  by  withholding  support 
from  the  ticket  made  up  of  Joseph  A. 
Wright  and  James  H.  Lane.  Although  Dr. 
Ellis  a  few  years  later  severed  his  connec- 
tion with  the  Democratic  party  on  the 
slavery  question,  he  was  too  staunch  a 
Democrat  in  1849  to  think  of  bolting  a 
Democratic  nomination.  So,  after  all,  he 
had  his  say  without  tumbling  outside  the 
breastworks.  Wright  and  Lane  were  tri- 
umphantly elected.  After  having  served 
his  term  as  Lieutenant-Governor,  Jim 
Lane  went  to  Kansas,  became  a  howling 
Freesoiler,  secured  a  seat  in  the  United 
States  Senate  as  a  Republican,  and  for 
some  unknown  reason  committed  suicide. 
Dr.  Ellis  was  elected  State  Auditor  by  the 
Legislature  with  the  help  of  Governor 
Wright,  but  three  years  later  was  denied 
a  renomination  by  the  Democratic  conven- 
tion after  the  office  had  been  made  elective 
by  the  people.  He  afterward  became  a  Re- 
publican. Governor  Wright  himself  broke 
with  the  party  in  1862,  and  in  considera- 
tion of  a  scathing  denunciation  of  his  old- 
time  associates,  was  by  Governor  Morton 
appointed  to  fill  the  Jesse  D.  Bright  va- 
cancy in  the  United  States  Senate. 

Joseph  A.  Wright  was  pre-eminently  a 
self-made  man.  Born  at  Washington,  Pa., 
April  17,  1810,  he  came  with  his  parents 
to  Indiana,  a  lad  of  unusual  promise.  He 
evinced  a  strong  desire  for  education  and 
availed  himself  of  the  earliest  opportunity 
to  gain  entrance  into  the  State  University 
at  Bloomington.  He  paid  his  way  in  that 
institution  by  doing  janitor's  work  and 
making  himself  generally  useful.  To  earn 
money  for  buying  books  and  clothing  he 
hauled  brick  from  the  brick  yard,  did  odd 
jobs  with  the  trowel,  and  gathered  nuts 
in  the  woods.  In  later  years  he  prided 
himself  considerably  on  the  sundry  allow- 
ances voted  him  by  the  Board  of  Trustees 
for  repairs  made  about  the  building. 
Toward  the  close  of  the  year  1828  he  had 

equipped  himself  educationally  so  as  to 
enter  the  law  otfice  of  Judge  Hester  as  a 
student.  Before  he  was  twenty  years  of 
age  he  obtained  his  license  to  practice  law. 
Shortly  thereafter  he  located  at  Rockville, 
where  he  hung  out  his  shingle  as  an  attor- 
ney at  law.  In  1830  he  was  elected  a 
member  of  the  Legislature,  in  which  body 
he  earnestly  sought  to  promote  the  wel- 
fare of  his  constituents  and  the  people  of 
Indiana  in  general.  During  the  "Tippe- 
canoe and  Tyler  too"  campaign  he  was 
promoted  to  the  State  Senate,  and  in  1843 
the  people  of  his  district  sent  him  to  Con- 
gress. His  aspirations  for  re-election 
were  frustrated  by  the  success  of  Edward 
W.  McGaughey,  who  beat  him  by  171 
votes.  His  nomination  and  election  to  the 
Governorship  by  a  majority  of  9,778  over 
so  popular  a  man  as  John  A.  Matson  was 
a  signal  triumph,  in  view  of  the  aggressive 
factional  animosity  that  had  been  arrayed 
against  him.  As  Governor  he  did  his 
utmost  to  promote  the  agricultural  inter- 
ests of  the  State.  Largely  through  his 
efforts  the  State  Agricultural  Society  was 
formed.  In  1852  he  was  elected  president 
of  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture  and 
twice  re-elected.  He  also  exerted  himself 
to  the  utmost  to  establish  a  safe  banking 
system.  The  State  having  at  a  previous 
election  declared  in  favor  of  a  new  Con- 
stitution, by  a  vote  of  33,173  for  to  28,843 
against,  he  interested  himself  earnestly  to 
have  that  mandate  executed  with  a  view 
to  assuring  the  framing  of  an  organic  law 
that  would  meet  amply  the  wants  and 
needs  of  this  rapidly  growing  Common- 
wealth. Throughout  his  career  he  fur- 
ni.shed  unvarying  proof  of  his  firm  belief 
in  and  exemplification  of  Carlyle's  creed, 
''Work  is  the  grand  cure  for  all  the  mala- 
dies and  miseries  that  ever  beset  mankind 
— honest  work  which  you  intend  getting 

The  campaign  made  by  Mr.  Wright  was 
largely  intellectual.  He  was  an  excellent 
mixer.      He   made   himself   easily    under- 


STORY      INDIANA     DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

stood  by  the  people.  He  never  talked  over 
their  heads.  And  he  always  talked  sense. 
One  point  he  particularly  impressed  with 
especial  emphasis  upon  his  hearers,  and 
that  was  the  importance  of  electing  the 
right  sort  of  men  for  county  commission- 
ers and  township  trustees.  With  a  twinkle 
in  his  eye  he  used  to  say:  "Pick  out  the 
best  man  in  your  county  for  commissioner ; 
if  you  have  in  your  community  some 
overly  ambitious  scapegrace  who  thinks  he 
must  be  cared  for,  send  him  to  Washing- 
ton— there  he'll  be  lost  in  the  shuffle." 

There  were  three  tickets  in  the  field — 
Democratic,  Whig  and  Freesoil.  The 
gubernatorial  candidate  of  the  Freesoilers 
was  James  H.  Cravens  of  Ripley  county, 
a  former  Whig  Congressman,  who  couldn't 
"swallow"  Taylor  the  year  before  and 
supported  Van  Buren  and  Adams.  The 
vote  in  the  State  stands  thus  recorded : 
Joseph  A.  Wright,  Democrat.  .76,996 

John  A.  Matson,  Whig 67,228 

James  H.  Cravens,  Freesoiler.  .   3,018 
FOR   LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR.  H.  Lane,  Democrat 77,002 

Thomas   S.  Stanfield,  Whig. .  .66,385 
John  W.  Wright,  Freesoiler. . .   2,795 
(This,  it  may  be  observed,  was  the  last  election 
held  for  Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor  only 
under  the  constitution  of  1816.) 

It  may  here  be  noted  that  under  the  old 
Constitution  members  of  Congress  were 
in  Indiana  elected  in  odd  years.  This  was 
deemed  necessary  when  that  Constitution 
was  framed  and  adopted,  on  account  of 
the  time  required  for  gathering  the  re- 
turns and  having  them  duly  tabulated  and 
certified.  Transportation  facilities  in  the 
early  days  were  not  what  they  became 
later  on.  In  case  a  special  session  of  Con- 
gress were  convened,  a  member  of  that 
body  would  have  found  it  exceedingly  dif- 
ficult to  reach  the  national  capital  in 
time  to  answer  the  roll  call  at  the  opening 
of  the  session. 

The  year  1849  was  a  propitious  one  for 
the  Indiana  Democracy.  Besides  electing 
its  candidates  for  Governor  and  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor by  decisive  majorities,  it 
secured  a  good  working  majority  in  the 
Legislature  and  elected  nine  of  its  ten 
nominees  for  Congress.  The  only  Demo- 
cratic candidate  for  Congress  defeated 
that  year  was  G.  F.  Conkley,  in  the  Sev- 
enth District,  who  was  beaten  by  Edward 
W.  McGaughey,  the  same  man  who  dis- 
tanced Joseph  A.  Wright  in  a  previous 
race  for  Congressional  honors. 

[Chapter  XIII.] 



ESSE  D.  BRIGHT  and  Joseph  G. 

J  I  Marshall  were  residents  of  the 
I  same  town — historic  Madison. 
I  Bright  was  a  native  of  New 
York;  Marshall  of  Kentucky. 
The  father  of  Bright  was  a 
manufacturer  of  hats,  and  a 
man  of  great  force  of  character;  Mar- 
shall's father  was  a  Presbyterian  minister 
of  distinguished  ability.  Born  in  a  slave 
State,  Marshall  was  not  enamored  of  the 
in.stitution  of  slavery;  Bright,  born  in  a 
free  State,  looked  upon  slavery  as  being 
entirely  justifiable,  and  in  course  of  time 
himself  became  a  slave  owner  in  Ken- 
tucky, while  maintaining  a  residence  in 
Indiana.  Both  equipped  themselves  for 
the  law,  and  both  dabbled  persistently 
and  extensively  in  politics.  The  coun- 
ty in  which  these  two  men  lived, 
Jefferson,  was  politically  Whig,  yet 
when  Bright  started  out  to  run  for 
an  elective  office  he  rarely  failed  to 
carry  the  county.  His  political  shrewd- 
ness and  his  ability  to  manipulate  were 
a  great  source  of  strength  to  him  in  his 
campaigning  and  in  his  aspirations. 
While  it  is  quite  true  that  Marshall  was 
several  times  sent  to  the  Legislature  from 
Jefferson  county,  it  is  equally  true  that  in 
his  larger  aspirations  he  was  uniformly 

Religiously,  Bright  was  a  Baptist;  Mar- 
shall a  Presbyterian.  To  what  extent 
they  permitted  religion  to  influence  their 
action  is  not  a  matter  of  record.  Evi- 
dently, however,  they  were  not  guided  in 
their  daily  walks  of  life  by  the  sublime 
doctrines  proclaimed  in  the  Sermon  from 
the  Mount: 

"Blessed  are  ye  when  men  shall  revile 
you  and  persecute  you  for  righteousness' 

"Ye  have  heard  it  said,  Love  your 
neighbor  and  hate  your  enemy.  But  I  say 
unto  you,  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them 
that  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that  hate 
you,  and  pray  for  them  that  despitefully 
use  you  and  persecute  you. 

"Ye  have  heard  it  said.  An  eye  for  an 
eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth.  But  I  say 
unto  you,  That  ye  resist  not  evil,  but  who- 
soever shall  smite  you  on  the  one  cheek, 
tuin  to  him  the  other  also." 

Marshall  was  twice  chosen  a  member 
of  the  Legislature,  in  1837  and  again  in 
1840.  At  the  State  election  in  1843 
Bright  was  chosen  Lieutenant-Governor. 
Albert  S.  White's  teiTn  as  United  States 
Senator  was  to  expire  March  3,  1845.  The 
Legislature  of  1844 — chosen  in  1843 — was 
to  elect  White's  successor.  The  Whigs 
had  a  majority  of  ten  on  joint  ballot. 
They  nominated  Marshall  for  Senator. 
The  Senate  was  a  tie.  As  Lieutenant- 
Governor  and  presiding  officer.  Bright 
gave  the  casting  vote  against  going  into 
an  election  for  Senator.  At  the  next  elec- 
tion the  Democrats  obtained  a  majority 
of  the  Legislature  and  Bright  managed  to 
capture  the  coveted  prize,  securing  the 
caucus  nomination  over  Governor  Whit- 
comb.  In  1846  Marshall  was  defeated  in 
the  race  for  Governor.  Eight  years  later 
substantially  a  similar  condition  to  that 
of  1844  arose.  Much  against  his  wishes 
Marshall  was  induced  to  run  for  Con- 
gress in  the  New  Albany  district  in  1852. 
He  was  defeated  by  Cyrus  L.  Dunham. 
Governor  Whitcomb  had  been  trans- 
ferred from  the  Governorship  to  the 
United  States  Senate.  He  died  in  the  fall 
of  1852.  Governor  Wright  temporarily 
filled  the  vacancy  by  the  appointment  of 
his  personal  and  political  friend,  Charles 
W.  Cathcart,  of  Laporte  county.  When 
the  Legislature  of  1853  met  John  Pettit 



19  1 

of  Lafayette  was  on  January  11  elected 
to  serve  during  the  remainder  of  Whit- 
comb's  term,  March'  3,  1855.  Bright 
wanted  Dr.  Graham  N.  Fitch  of  Logans- 
port  as  his  colleague.  In  the  Legislative 
caucus  the  vote  stood  54  for  Pettit  to  46 
for  Fitch.  The  selection  of  Pettit  was  a 
victory  for  Governor  Wright  and  a  defeat 
for  Senator  Bright.  At  the  election  of 
1854  a  fusion  of  Whigs,  Know-Nothings 
and  Freesoilers  was  effected.  By  this 
fusion  the  combined  opposition  had  se- 
cured a  majority  of  14  on  joint  ballot. 
The  Senate  was  Democratic  by  a  majority 
of  two.  Through  the  intercession  of  Sen- 
ator Bright  and  Lieutenant-Governor 
Ashbel  P.  Willard  the  Senate  refused  to 
go  into  joint  session.  The  fusion  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  had  agreed  on 
electing  Joseph  G.  Marshall  for  United 
States  Senator.  A  joint  session  being  re- 
fused, Marshall  again  was  doomed  to  dis- 
appointment. Naturally  he  felt  the  sting 
of  defeat  quite  keenly.  Two  years  later 
Graham  N.  Fitch  was  elected. 

In  1851  Mr.  Marshall  became  deeply  in- 
terested in  the  proposition  to  sell  the 
State's  interest  in  the  Madison  and  In- 
dianapolis Railroad.  He  took  quite  an 
active  part  in  the  contest  for  the  election 
of  members  of  the  Legislature  that  was 
to  take  final  action  on  this  proposition. 
In  the  course  of  a  speech  on  this  subject 
Marshall  made  a  statement  which  Bright, 
who  happened  to  be  in  attendance  at  this 
meeting,  emphatically  denied.  Marshall 
reiterated  his  statement  with  consider- 
able warmth.  This  episode  resulted  in  the 
issuance  and  acceptance  of  a  challenge  to 
a  duel  at  Louisville.  Before  the  challenge 
was  issued  Marshall  had  purchased  a 
bowie-knife  with  which,  according  to  his 
own  statement,  he  intended  to  kill  Senator 
Bright  while  going  to  the  postofRce  for 
his  mail.  Fortunately  Bright  did  not  go 
for  his  mail  at  his  usual  time,  and  the 
threatened  encounter  was  thus  happily 
averted.      Marshall    said    Bright    always 

went  armed,  so  no  advantage  would  have 
been  taken  had  the  bowie-knife  attack 
been  actually  made. 

All  the  preliminaries  for  the  duel  at 
Louisville  had  been  arranged.  The  com- 
batants went  by  boat  on  the  Ohio.  The 
seconds,  surgeons,  etc.,  that  had  been 
chosen  on  both  sides  happened  to  be  men 
of  good  common  sense.  By  judicious 
parleying  they  managed  somehow  to  effect 
an  adjustment,  the  terms  of  which  very 
properly  never  were  divulged.  Whether 
these  two  eminent  antagonists  ever  be- 
came reconciled  to  one  another  nobody 
now  living  is  able  to  tell. 

W.  W.  Woollen  lived  in  the  same  town 
with  Bright  and  Marshall.  He  knew  both 
of  them  quite  well.  In  his  admirable 
"Sketches  of  Early  Indiana"  he  speaks 
thus  of  the  able  man  of  numerous  disap- 
pointments and  defeats : 

"Scotch-Irish  and  cavalier  blood  mingled 
in  the  veins  of  Joseph  G.  Marshall.  Like 
the  North  of  Ireland  man,  he  got  all  the 
contention  out  of  a  thing  there  was  in  it; 
and  like  the  cavalier,  he  was  warm- 
hearted, impulsive,  and  brave.  When  con- 
tending for  a  principle  be  believed  to  be 
right  you  would  imagine  him  a  born  son 
of  Carrickf ergus ;  when  at  the  fireside,  or 
around  the  social  board,  he  would  impress 
you  as  one  born  on  the  banks  of  the  York 
or  the  James.  His  father  was  a  Scotch- 
Irishman  and  his  mother  a  Virginian,  so 
his  leading  characteristics  were  his  by  in- 

"Joseph  Glass  Marshall  was  born  in 
Fayette  county,  Ky.,  January  18,  1800. 
His  father  was  a  Presbyterian  minister, 
and  he  thoroughly  indoctrinated  the  son 
in  the  principles  of  the  Scottish  Church. 
He  was  fitted  for  college  at  home,  enter- 
ing Translyvania  University  as  a  junior, 
and  graduating  from  that  institution  in 
182.3.  In  1828  he  came  to  Indiana  and 
settled  at  Madison,  where  he  resided  until 
he  died.  He  had  studied  law  in  Kentucky, 
and  although  a  young  man  in  a  town  noted 
for  the  strength  of  its  bar,  he  soon  ob- 
tained a  lucrative  practice.  Two  years 
after  coming  to  Indiana  he  was  elected 
Probate  Judge  of  his  county,  and  dis- 
charged the  duties  of  the  office  with  signal 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

ability.  When  he  left  the  judgeship  he 
returned  to  the  bar.  In  1836,  1840  and 
1844  he  was  on  the  Whig  electoral  ticket, 
and  each  time  made  an  active  canvass  of 
the  State.  In  1846  he  was  nominated  for 
Governor  and  was  beaten  by  James  Whit- 
comb  .S.9o8  votes.  In  1849  President  Tay- 
lor appointed  him  Governor  of  Oregon, 
but  he  refused  the  place.  Before  declin- 
ing, however,  he  went  to  Washington  and 
personally  thanked  the  President  for  the 
tender  of  the  oflice.  In  1850  he  was 
elected  Senator  from  his  county,  and 
served  the  legal  term.  In  1852,  much 
against  his  wishes,  he  was  nominated  for 
Congress  in  his  district,  and  was  beaten 
by  Cyrus  L.  Dunham  931  votes.  This 
was  the  last  race  he  made  before  the 
people.  In  addition  to  the  offices  named, 
he  represented  his  county  several  times  in 
the  lower  branch  of  the  State  Legislature. 

"Mr.  Marshall  had  an  ambition  to  go 
to  the  United  States  Senate,  but  his  ambi- 
tion was  never  gratified.  In  the  Legisla- 
ture of  1844  the  Whigs  had  ten  majority 
on  joint  ballot.  They  nominated  him  for 
the  Senate,  but  the  Democrats  refused  to 
go  into  an  election.  Each  party  had 
twenty-five  members  in  the  Senate,  and 
Jesse  D.  Bright,  then  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor, gave  the  casting  vote  against  going 
into  the  election.  In  1845  the  Democrats 
carried  the  Legislature,  and  elected  Mr. 
Bright  to  the  Senate,  his  vote  being  80, 
and  Mr.  Marshall's  66.  His  defeat  the 
year  before  incensed  him  against  Mr. 
Bright,  and  ever  afterward  he  hated  him. 

"In  the  Legislature  of  1854  the  People's, 
or  anti-Nebraska  party,  had  a  majority  of 
fourteen  on  joint  ballot,  but  the  Demo- 
crats, having  two  majority  in  the  Senate, 
prevented  the  election  of  a  Senator.  Mr. 
Marshall  was  the  nominee  of  the  dominant 
party,  and  had  an  election  been  held  he 
would  have  been  chosen.  Thus  it  will  be 
seen  that  he  was  twice  kept  from  going 
to  the  Senate  by  the  refusal  of  the  Demo- 
crats to  perform  a  legal  duty. 

"Mr.  Marshall  was  at  Indianapolis  most 
of  the  time  during  the  session  of  the  Leg- 
islature of  1854-5,  and  while  there  con- 
tracted a  deep  cold.  The  cold  settled  on 
his  lungs  and  soon  became  alarming. 
Early  in  the  spring  of  1855  he  started  on 
a  Southern  trip,  in  hopes  of  regaining  his 
health.  When  he  reached  Louisville,  be- 
ing too  sick  to  proceed  farther,  he  took 

to  his  bed,  and,  on  the  8th  of  April,  1855, 
died.  His  remains  were  brought  to  Madi- 
son and  there  interred. 

"Indiana  never  had  the  equal  of  Mr. 
Marshall  in  breadth  and  strength  of  in- 
tellect. Neither  did  she  ever  have  his 
equal  in  ability  to  stir  the  passions  and 
sway  the  feelings  of  the  people.  She  has 
had  men  of  greater  culture  and  of  more 
general  information,  but  in  those  qualities 
which  enable  the  orator  to  melt  the  hearts 
and  fire  the  passions  of  his  auditors  he 
was  without  a  peer.  He  was  called  the 
"Sleeping  Lion,"  and,  when  fully  aroused, 
he  was  a  lion  indeed. 

"On  such  occasions  his  oratory  was  like 
the  hurricane  that  sweeps  everything  be- 
fore it.  Ordinarily  he  did  not  show  his 
power,  but  when  engaged  in  a  case  that 
enlisted  his  feelings  and  his  conscience  his 
words  were  like  hot  shot  from  the  can- 
non's mouth. 

"Colonel  Abram  W.  Hendricks,  in  a  re- 
cent address,  thus  speaks  of  Mr.  Marshall : 
'He  was  one  of  the  most  transcendently 
powerful  advocates  that  have  figured  at 
the  Indiana  bar.  His  intellect  was  colossal. 
He  seemed  to  know  the  law  by  intuition. 
His  logic  was  surrounded  by  a  glowing 
atmosphere  of  passion.  He  could  sweep 
through  his  subject  like  a  tempest  or 
crush  through  it  like  an  avalanche.' 
Colonel  Hendricks  had  practice  at  the  bar 
with  him  for  many  years,  and  knew 
whereof  he  spoke. 

"Mr.  Marshall  was  very  careless  of  his 
dress.  He  didn't  care  whether  his  coat 
fitted  him  or  not,  or  whether  the  bow  on 
his  neck-stock  was  under  his  ear  or  his 
chin.  He  usually  wore  low  shoes,  and 
there  was  often  quite  a  distance  between 
his  shoetops  and  the  bottom  of  his  panta- 
loons. He  carried  his  papers  in  his  hat 
instead  of  his  pockets,  and  wore  his  hat 
pulled  low  down  upon  his  head.  He  had 
a  great  big  head,  thickly  covered  with 
sandy  hair.  His  forehead,  mouth  and 
nose  were  large  and  prominent.  His  eyes 
were  a  light  blue,  and  were  the  least  ex- 
pressive of  his  features.  He  stood  over 
six  feet  high.  His  body  was  not  sym- 
metrical, being  from  his  shoulders  to  his 
hips  the  same  in  size.  It  was  his 
head  and  face  that  told  you  the  manner 
of  man  he  was.  These  were  magnificent, 
and  his  uncouth  form  and  careless  dress 
served  to  show  them  to  the  best  advantage. 
Had  he  gone  to  the  Senate,  as  he  should 


19  1 

have  done,  he  would  have  made  a  reputa- 
tion equal  to  any  one  in  the  land.  He  had 
the  ability  to  shine  anywhere  and  would 
not  have  suffered  by  comparison  with  the 
ablest  men  in  that  body." 

With  reference  to  the  refusal  of  the 
State  Senate  on  two  occasions  to  agree 
to  go  into  joint  session  for  the  purpose  of 
electing  a  United  States  Senator,  it  may 
be  stated  that  in  those  days  State  Legis- 
latures were  privileged  to  do  as  they 
pleased  about  such  matters.     There  was 

no  federal  law  governing  the  election  of 
United  States  Senators.  On  another  page 
David  Turpie  relates,  intelligently  and 
comprehensively,  how  Congress  finally 
came  to  pass  a  law  prescribing  when  and 
how  United  States  Senators  were  to  be 
chosen  by  State  Legislatures.  This  legis- 
lative enactment  has  since  been  superseded 
by  the  adoption  of  an  amendment  to  the 
Federal  Constitution  making  United 
States  Senators  elective  by  direct  vote  of 
the  people. 


[Chapter  XIV.] 

DURING  DECADE  (1843  TO  1853) 

IHE  census  of  1840,  revealing 
another  extraordinary  increase 
of  population,  gave  Indiana 
three  additional  Congressmen, 
raising  the  State's  apportion- 
ment from  seven  to  ten.  Under 
this  apportionment  the  follow- 
ing named  gentlemen  were  chosen  for  the 
Twentv-eighth   Congress— 1843   to   1845: 

1.  Robert  Dale  Owen. 

2.  Thomas  J.  Henley. 

3.  Thomas  Smith. 

4.  Caleb  B.  Smith. 

5.  William  J.  Brown. 

6.  John  W.  Davis. 

7.  Joseph  A.  Wright. 

8.  John  Pettit. 

9.  Samuel  C.  Sample. 
10.  Andrew  Kennedy. 

Thomas  Jefferson  Henley  was  the  first 
native  of  Indiana  to  be  elected  to  Con- 
gress. He  was  born  in  1810 ;  attended  the 
State  University  at  Bloomington;  was 
State  Representative  from  1832  to  1842, 
and  Speaker  of  the  House  one  term; 
elected  to  Congress  as  a  Democrat  for 
three  successive  terms  (1843  to  1849)  ; 
moved  to  California  in  1849  and  engaged 
in  banking  in  San  Francisco.  Was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  first  California  Legislature; 
Superintendent  of  Indian  affairs  of  Cali- 
fornia for  seven  years,  and  wound  up  his 
official  career  with  the  po.stmastership  of 
San  Francisco. 

Caleb  Blood  Smith  was  born  in  Boston, 
Mass.,  April  16,  1808;  moved  with  his 
parents  to  Ohio  in  1814;  was  graduated 
from  the  Miami  University;  studied  law, 
was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  began  prac- 
tice in  Connersville,  Ind. ;  founded  and 
edited  the  Indiana  Sentinel  in  1832;  mem- 
ber of  the  State  House  of  Representatives 
1833-1836,  and  served  as  Speaker  in  1836; 
elected    to    the    Twenty-eighth,    Twenty- 

ninth  and  Thirtieth  Congresses  (March  4, 
1843-March  3,  1849)  ;  presidential  elector 
in  1840;  moved  to  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  and 
practiced  law:  presidential  elector  on  the 
Fremont  ticket  in  1856;  President  of  the 
Republican  National  Convention  of  1860; 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  under  President 
Lincoln  March  5,  1861,  to  January  1, 
1863;  resigned  to  become  judge  for  the 
District  of  Indiana.  Died  in  Indianapolis 
January  7,  1864. 

William  J.  Brown  was  for  years  one  of 
Indiana's  most  influential  politicians — 
adroit,  alert,  sagacious  and  courageous. 
He  was  born  in  Kentucky  November  22, 
1805;  in  1821  moved  to  Indiana;  member 
of  the  State  Legislature  and  Secretary  of 
State  for  Indiana;  elected  as  a  Democrat 
to  the  Twenty-eighth  Congress  (March  4, 
1843-March  3,  1845)  ;  Second  Assistant 
Postmaster  General,  1845-1849;  again 
elected  to  (the  Thirty-first)  Congress 
(March  4,  1849-March  3,  1851)  ;  editor 
of  the  Indiana  Sentinel  and  State  Libra- 
rian of  Indiana;  special  agent  of  the 
Postoflice  Department  for  Indiana  and 
Illinois.  Died  near  Indianapolis,  March 
18,  1857. 

Samuel  C.  Sample  was  born  in  Mary- 
land; moved  to  Indiana  and  settled  in 
South  Bend;  elected  as  a  Whig  to  Con- 
gress for  one  term,  from  1843  to  1845. 

(Robert  Dale  Owen,  Thomas  Smith, 
John  W.  Davis,  Joseph  A.  Wright,  John 
Pettit  and  Andrew  Kennedy  are  duly  men- 
tioned elsewhere.) 

A  notably  able  delegation  was  chosen 
by  the  people  of  Indiana  to  represent  them 
in  the  Twenty-ninth  Congress,  from  1845 
to  1847: 

1.  Robert  Dale  Owen. 

2.  Thomas  J.  Henley. 

3.  Thomas  Smith. 

4.  Caleb  B.  Smith. 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

5.  William  W.  Wick. 

6.  John  W.  Davis. 

7.  Edward  W.  McGaughey. 

8.  John  Pettit. 

9.  Charles  W.  Cathcart. 
10.  Andrew  Kennedy. 

Edward  W.  McGaughey  was  twice 
elected  to  Congress,  from  1845  to  1847, 
and  from  1849  to  1851.  He  was  a  cam- 
paigner of  considerable  resourcefulness 
and  ingenuity. 

Charles  W.  Cathcart  was  twice  elected 
to  Congress  from  the  Laporte  district. 
Upon  the  death  of  Senator  James  Whit- 
comb,  October  4,  1852,  Governor  Wright 
appointed  Mr.  Cathcart  to  serve  as  Whit- 
comb's  successor  until  the  Legislature 
would  effect  an  election.  Cathcart  took 
his  seat  December  6,  1852,  and  held  it  un- 
til "relieved"  by  John  Pettit,  January  18, 
1853.  Thus  the  Whitcomb  seat  in  the 
Senate  had  three  different  occupants  dur- 
ing the  six-year  term. 

In  the  Thirtieth  Congress  (1847  to 
1849)  Indiana  was  represented  by  these 
gentlemen : 

1.  Elisha  Embree. 

2.  Thomas  J.  Henley. 

3.  John  L.  Robinson. 

4.  Caleb  B.  Smith. 

5.  William  W.  Wick. 

6.  George  C.  Dunn. 

7.  Richard  W.  Thompson. 

8.  John  Pettit. 

9.  Charles  W.  Cathcart. 
10.  William   Rockhill. 

New  names  in  this  list  are  those  of 
Elisha  Embree,  John  L.  Robinson,  Geo.  G. 
Dunn  and  William  Rockhill. 

Elisha  Embree  was  a  native  of  Lincoln 
county,  Kentucky ;  came  with  his  father  to 
Indiana  in  1811;  practiced  law  at  Prince- 
ton; served  as  circuit  judge  from  1835  to 
1845;  elected  to  Congress  as  a  Whig;  de- 
feated as  candidate  for  re-election.  Died 
at  Princeton,  February  28,  1863. 

John  L.  Robinson  was  conspicuous  in 
Indiana  politics  for  twenty  years.  Born 
in  Mason  county,  Kentucky,  May  3,  1814, 
he  came  to  Indiana  when  eighteen  years  of 
age,   locating  in   Rush  county,  where  he 

made  himself  useful  in  a  country  store. 
By  and  by  he  engaged  in  business  for  him- 
self, but  success  did  not  crown  his  efforts. 
His  mind  concerned  itself  more  with  the 
study  of  human  nature  and  the  current  of 
events  than  with  figuring  out  a  reasonable 
profit  on  the  commodities  usually  sold  in 
a  country  store.  And  in  those  days  a  coun- 
try store  was  a  great  place  for  expound- 
ing doctrines,  cultivating  public  sentiment 
and  espousing  various  causes.  John  L. 
Robinson  was  a  master  hand  at  this.  It 
didn't  take  long  for  him  to  establish  a  lo- 
cal reputation  for  political  sagacity  and 
shrewdness.  When  but  twenty-six  years 
of  age  his  name  was  placed  on  the  Van 
Buren  electoral  ticket  in  1840.  He  was  no 
mere  figurehead  in  this  assignment.  He 
went  on  the  stump  and  acquitted  himself 
so  masterfully  as  to  astonish  both  friend 
and  foe.  Though  the  party  with  which  he 
affiliated  was  overwhelmingly  defeated  in 
that  campaign,  John  L.  Robinson  had  an 
abiding  faith  that  a  turn  in  affairs  po- 
litical was  but  a  question  of  time.  And  he 
was  right  about  this.  Two  years  after  the 
defeat  just  narrated  he  was  triumphantly 
elected  clerk  of  Rush  county.  Before  he 
had  completed  his  second  term  he  was 
elected  to  Congress  and  twice  re-elected 
thereafter.  Upon  the  accession  of  Frank- 
lin Pierce  to  the  Presidency,  Robinson  was 
appointed  United  States  Marshal  of  In- 
diana. In  this  position  he  was  enabled  to 
wield  considerable  influence  throughout 
the  State.  And  he  availed  himself  of  it  to 
the  utmost.  He  was  closely  allied  with 
Senator  Bright  and  proved  himself  a  most 
efficient  lieutenant  to  that  adroit  political 
chieftain,  who  in  turn  greatly  appreciated 
the  services  rendered.  In  terms  of  affec- 
tion. Bright  spoke  of  Robinson  as  "a  very 
brother."  Bright's  friendship  for  Robin- 
son was  put  to  a  severe  test  when  the  lat- 
ter got  the  notion  into  his  head  that  he 
wanted  to  be  Governor  of  Indiana.  An- 
other dear  friend  of  Bright's,  Ashbel  P. 
Willard,  nursed  a  similar  ambition.  The 
matter  was  finally  adjusted  to  the  satis- 




faction  of  all  concerned  by  an  agreement 
that  Bright  should  keep  hands  off  and  let 
Willard  and  Robinson  fight  it  out  between 
themselves.  They  did,  and  Willard  won. 
Robinson  had  his  reward  in  being  reap- 
pointed to  the  United  States  marshalship, 
which  position  he  retained  up  to  the  time 
of  his  death  at  his  home  in  Rushville, 
March  21,  1860. 

One  who  knew  Mr.  Robiifson  intimate- 
ly, personally  and  politically,  thus  summed 
up  his  character:  "Of  all  the  public  men 
I  ever  knew,  he  was  farthest  removed 
from  the  time-server  and  the  demagogue. 
He  despised  political  intrigue,  chicanery, 
dissimulation,  tergiversation,  untruth  and 
injustice,  and  held  with  Jefferson  that  'an 
honest  heart  is  the  first  blessing,  a  know- 
ing head  is  the  second.'  .  .  .  His 
marked  decision  of  character,  his  clear 
judgment,  his  unselfish  devotion  to  the 
popular  cause,  his  unfaltering  faith  in  the 
masses  of  his  party,  his  pre-eminent  abil- 
ities as  the  advocate  and  defender  of  pop- 
ular rights,  combined  to  make  him,  as  ac- 
knowledgedly  he  was,  the  heart  and  head 
leader  of  the  Democracy  of  Indiana." 

George  G.  Dunn  was  born  in  Kentucky 
in  1813;  moved  to  Indiana;  admitted  to 
the  bar  and  practiced  in  Bedford;  was 
elected  prosecuting  attorney,  and  in  that 
capacity  proved  himself  a  terror  to  evil- 
doers and  criminals.  Served  in  both 
Houses  of  the  Legislature  and  was  at  two 
different  times  elected  to  Congress — first 
as  a  Whig  and  later  on  as  a  sort  of  com- 
bination candidate.  As  the  product  of  po- 
litical mongrelism  he  did  very  much  as  he 
pleased,  supremely  indifferent  as  to 
whether  school  kept  or  not.  He  was  a 
strong  man,  and  was  at  one  time  in  part- 
nership with  Richard  W.  Thompson. 
Died  at  Bedford,  September  24,  1857. 

William  Rockhill  was  a  native  of  New 
Jersey,  where  he  was  born  February  10, 
1793.  Had  a  limited  education.  Located 
at  Fort  Wayne,  and  was  elected  a  member 

of  the  Thirtieth  Congress.  He  served  but 
one  term.  Died  at  Fort  Wayne,  January 
15,  1865. 

Of  the  Indiana  delegation  to  the  Thirty- 
first  Congress  (1849  to  1851)  all  but  one 
were  Democrats.  The  solitary  exception 
was  Edward  W.  McGaughey.  It  was  a 
strong  delegation  and  consisted  of  these 
widely-known  gentlemen : 

1.  Nathaniel  Albertson. 

2.  Cyrus  L.  Dunham. 

3.  John  L.  Robinson. 

4.  George  W.  Julian. 

5.  William  J.  Brown. 

6.  Willis  A.  Gorman. 

7.  Edward  W.  McGaughey. 

8.  Joseph  E.  McDonald. 

9.  Graham  N.  Fitch. 
10.  Andrew  J.  Harlan. 

Nathaniel  Albertson  was  born  in  Vir- 
ginia, moved  to  Greenville,  Ind.,  and  was 
elected  as  a  Democrat  to  Congress.  Served 
but  one  term. 

A  truly  remarkable  man  was  Cyrus  L. 
Dunham.  Briefly  told,  his  record  shows 
him  to  have  been  born  at  Dryden,  Tomp- 
kins county.  New  York,  January  16,  1817. 
He  was  distinctively  self-educated.  Upon 
his  removal  to  Indiana  he  located  at  Salem, 
Washington  county,  where  he  studied  law 
and  in  course  of  time  was  admitted  to  the 
bar.  He  engaged  in  agricultural  pursuits 
and  was  made  prosecuting  attorney  of  the 
circuit  court,  in  which  position  he  distin- 
guished himself  by  his  absolute  fearles.s- 
ness.  He  established  quite  a  reputation  as 
a  criminal  lawyer  and  became  famous  as 
a  public  speaker  of  unusual  power  and 
eloquence.  In  1846  he  was  elected  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Legislature  and  re-elected  the 
year  following.  While  serving  in  this  ca- 
pacity he  became  quite  active  in  support 
of  a  bill  to  authorize  the  holding  of  a  con- 
vention to  frame  a  new  State  Constitu- 
tion. In  1848  he  was  a  Cass  and  Butler 
elector.  The  next  year  he  was  nominated 
for  Congress  by  the  Democracy  of  the 
second  district  and  triumphantly  elected 
over  William  McKee  Dunn  by  a  majority 
of  485.    Two  years  later  he  was  re-elected 


19  16 

by  a  majority  of  963  over  Roger  Martin. 
In  1852  he  defeated  Joseph  G.  Marshall, 
one  of  the  ablest  and  most  highly  esteemed 
men  in  the  State,  by  a  majority  of  931. 
when  Know-Nothingism  caused  a  sort  of 
political  dementia  in  1853  and  1854,  Dun- 
ham made  his  fourth  race,  his  competitor 
being  George  G.  Dunn,  and  was  beaten  by 
1,660  votes.  This  ended  Dunham's  Con- 
gressional career.  When  Daniel  McClure 
resigned  as  Secretary  of  State,  Governor 
Willard  appointed  Mr.  Dunham  to  fill  out 
the  unexpired  term,  ending  the  latter  part 
of  1860.  It  was  in  the  early  part  of  that 
year  that  Mr.  Dunham  conceived  the  idea 
of  competing  with  Thomas  A.  Hendricks 
for  the  nomination  for  Governor.  Dun- 
ham was  a  supporter  of  the  Buchanan  ad- 
ministration, while  the  great  body  of  the 
Indiana  Democracy  upheld  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  in  the  Kansas-Nebraska  fight.  It 
soon  became  apparent  to  Mr.  Dunham  that 
the  Buchanan-Bright  faction  was  in  a 
hopeless  minority.  Gracefully  he  accepted 
the  situation  and  in  a  singularly  eloquent 
speech  he  moved  the  unanimous  nomina- 
tion of  Thomas  A.  Hendricks. 

Soon  after  the  breaking  out  of  the  civil 
war  Cyrus  L.  Dunham  organized  the  Fif- 
tieth Regiment  Indiana  Volunteers  and 
took  it  to  the  front.  After  serving  about 
a  year,  faithfully  and  heroically  fighting 
for  his  country,  ill-health  compelled  him  to 
resign  and  retire  from  the  service.  Upon 
his  return  from  the  field  he  located  in  New 
Albany  and  resumed  the  practice  of  law. 
In  1864  he  was  elected  to  the  Legislature 
and  took  a  leading  part  in  the  proceedings 
of  that  body.  In  1871  he  was  elected 
judge  of  the  Floyd  and  Clark  Circuit 
Court.  While  holding  this  office  he  re- 
moved to  Jeffersonville,  remaining  a  resi- 
dent thereof  until  death  ended  his  event- 
ful career,  November  21,  1877. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  men  sent  to 
Congress  from  Indiana  was  George  Wash- 
ington Julian.  He  was  the  second  native 
Indianian  to  be  elected  to  Congress.  In 
his  biography  it  is  stated  that  he  was  born 

near  Center\nlle,  Ind.,  May  5,  1817;  at- 
tended the  common  schools;  studied  law 
and  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1840 ;  mem- 
ber of  the  State  House  of  Representatives 
in  1845;  delegate  in  the  Buffalo  Freesoil 
convention,  and  Van  Buren  elector  in 
1848 ;  candidate  for  Vice-President  on  the 
Freesoil  ticket  in  1852;  delegate  to  the 
National  Republican  Convention  in  Pitts- 
burgh in  1856;  elected  as  a  Freesoiler  to 
the  Thirty-first  Congress  (March  4,  1849- 
March  3,  1851)  ;  elected  as  a  Republican 
to  the  Thirty-seventh,  Thirty-eighth,  Thir- 
ty-ninth, Fortieth  and  Forty-first  Con- 
gresses (March  4,  1861-March  3;  1871)  ; 
supported  Tilden  and  Hendricks  in  1876; 
appointed  by  President  Cleveland  Sur- 
veyor-General of  New  Mexico  December 
13,  1886,  and  served  four  years.  Died  in 
Irvington,  a  suburb  of  Indianapolis,  July 
7,  1899. 

Willis  A.  Gorman  was  born  near  Flem- 
ingsburg,  Ky.,  January  12,  1816;  pursued 
an  academic  course;  studied  law,  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar  in  1835,  and  began  prac- 
tice in  Bloomington,  Ind. ;  Clerk  of  the  In- 
diana Senate  1837-1838;  Major  and 
Colonel  of  Indiana  Volunteers  in  the  Mex- 
ican war;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to  the 
Thirty-first  and  Thirty-second  Congresses 
(March  4,  1849-March  3,  1853)  ;  Terri- 
torial Governor  of  Minnesota  1853-1857; 
delegate  to  the  Constitutional  Convention 
of  Minnesota  in  1857 ;  practiced  law  in  St. 
Paul,  Minn.,  1857-1861 ;  entered  the  Union 
army;  Colonel  First  Minnesota  Infantry 
April  29,  1861 ;  Brigadier-General  of  Vol- 
unteers September  7,  1861;  mustered  out 
May  4,  1864;  elected  city  attorney  of  St. 
Paul  in  1869.  Died  in  St.  Paul,  Minn., 
May  20,  1876. 

Joseph  Ewing  McDonald  became  dis- 
tinguished in  his  adopted  State  as  one  of 
its  ablest  lawyers,  most  sagacious  and 
courageous  politicians,  and  a  statesman  of 
the  highest  type.  Born  in  Butler  county, 
Ohio,  August  29,  1819;  moved  with  his 
mother  to  Indiana  in  1826 ;  apprenticed  to 
the  saddler's  trade  in  Lafayette,  Ind.;  at- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  181G-1916 

tended  Wabash  College,  Crawfordsville, 
Ind.,  but  did  not  graduate;  studied  law, 
was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1843,  and  com- 
menced practice  in  Crawfordsville ;  Prose- 
cuting Attorney  1843-1847 ;  elected  to  the 
Thirty-first  Congress  (March  4,  1849- 
March  3,  1851)  ;  elected  Attorney-General 
of  Indiana  in  1856  and  re-elected  in  1858 ; 
moved  to  Indianapolis  in  1859 ;  unsuccess- 
ful candidate  for  Governor  of  Indiana  in 
1864;  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate, 
and  served  from  March  4,  1875,  to  March 
3,  1881.  Died  in  Indianapolis,  June  21, 

A  most  remarkable  career  had  Andrew 
Jackson  Harlan,  who  was  born  near  Wil- 
mington, Clinton  county,  Ohio,  March  29, 
1815;  attended  the  public  schools;  studied 
law,  and  was  admitted  to  the  bar;  moved 
to  Marion,  Ind.;  Clerk  of  the  Indiana 
House  of  Representatives  in  1842  and  a 
member  1846-1848 ;  elected  &s  a  Democrat 
to  the  Thirty-first  Congress  (March  4, 
1849-March  3,  1851)  ;  re-elected  to  the 
Thirty-third  Congress  (March  4,  1853- 
March  3,  1855)  ;  moved  to  Dakota  Terri- 
tory in  1861;  Member  of  the  Territorial 
Legislature  in  1861,  and  served  as  Speak- 
er; driven  from  the  Territory  by  the  In- 
dians and  settled  in  Savannah,  Mo.,  and 
resumed  the  practice  of  law;  member  of 
the  Missouri  Legislature  and  served  three 
years  as  Speaker;  moved  to  Wakeeney, 
Kan.,  in  1883;  postmaster  of  Wakeeney 
four  years ;  removed  to  Savannah,  Mo.,  in 
1892.  Died  in  Savannah,  Mo.,  May  19, 

The  last  delegation  to  be  sent  to  Wash- 
ington under  the  census  of  1840  and  the 
apportionment  made  thereunder  was  a 
distinguished  and  influential  one  in  the 
Thirty-second  Congress  (1851  to  1853). 
It  was  composed  of — 

Daniel   Mace. 
Graham  N.  Fitch. 
Samuel  Brenton. 

James  Lockhart. 
Cyrus  L.  Dunham. 
John  L.  Robinson. 
Samuel  W.  Parker. 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks. 
Willis  A.  Gorman. 
John   G.   Davis. 

James  Lockhart  was  born  in  Auburn, 
N.  Y.,  February  13,  1806;  moved  to  In- 
diana in  1832;  studied  law,  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  and  commenced  practice  in 
Evansville  in  1834 ;  Prosecuting  Attorney 
of  Vanderburg  county  1841-1842;  Judge 
of  the  Fourth  Judicial  District  1845-1851 ; 
Delegate  to  the  State  Constitutional  Con- 
vention of  1850 ;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to 
the  Thirty-second  Congress  (March  4, 
1851-March  3,  1853)  ;  re-elected  to  the 
Thirty-fifth  Congress,  but  died  before  the 
assembling  of  the  Congress  in  Evansville, 
September  7,  1857. 

Samuel  W.  Parker  was  born  in  Jeffer- 
son county,  New  York,  September  9,  1805 ; 
was  graduated  from  Miami  University, 
Ohio,  in  1828;  studied  law,  was  admitted 
to  the  bar,  and  began  practice  in  Conners- 
ville,  Ind. ;  held  several  local  offices ;  mem- 
ber of  the  State  House  of  Representatives 
1836-1841;  State's  Attorney  for  two 
years ;  elected  as  a  Whig  to  the  Thirty-sec- 
ond and  Thirty-third  Congresses  (March 
4,  1851-March  3,  1855)  ;  Presidential 
Elector  1844-1856. 

Thomas  A.  Hendricks  was  born  near 
Zanesville,  Ohio,  September  7,  1819; 
moved  with  his  parents  to  Madison,  Ind., 
then  to  Shelby  county  in  1832 ;  pursued 
classical  studies  and  was  graduated  from 
South  Hanover  College  in  1841 ;  studied 
law  in  Chambersburg,  Pa.;  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  in  1843,  and  began  practice  in 
Shelbyville,  Ind. ;  State  Representative  in 
1848  and  a  State  Senator  in  1849;  member 
of  the  State  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1851 ;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to  the  Thirty- 
second  and  Thirty-third  Congresses 
(March  4,  1851-March  3,  1855)  ;  Commis- 
sioner of  General  Land  Office  1855-1859; 
unsuccessful  Democratic  candidate  for 
Governor  in  1860;  moved  to  Indianapolis 
in  1860;  elected  United  States  Senator, 
and  served  from  March  4,  1863,  to  March 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

3,  1869;  elected  Governor  in  1872;  elected 
Vice-President  on  the  Tilden  ticket  in 
1876,  but  counted  out  by  the  Electoral 
Commission  of  1877 ;  elected  Vice-Presi- 
dent on  the  Democratic  ticket  in  1884. 
Died  in  Indianapolis,  November  25,  1885. 
Daniel  Mace  was  born  in  Pickaway 
county,  Ohio,  September  5,  1811 ;  attended 
the  public  schools;  studied  law,  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar,  and  commenced  prac- 
tice in  Lafayette,  Ind. ;  member  of  the 
State  House  of  Representatives  in  1836; 
Clerk  of  the  State  House  of  Representa- 
tives in  1837 ;  United  States  Attorney  for 
Indiana  1849-1853;  elected  as  a  Democrat 
to  the  Thirty-second  and  Thirty-third 
Congresses  (March  4,  1851-March  3, 
1855)  ;  re-elected  as  a  Republican  to  the 
Thirty-fourth  Congress  (March  4,  1855- 
March  3,  1857)  ;  appointed  postmaster  of 
Lafayette  by  President  Lincoln.  Died  in 
Lafayette,  July  26,  1867. 

Samuel  Brenton  was  born  in  Gallatin 
county,  Kentucky,  November  22,  1810; 
minister  of  the  gospel  1830-1848 ;  suffered 
a  paralytic  stroke  in  1848  and  compelled 
to  abandon  the  ministry ;  appointed  Regis- 
trar of  the  Land  Office  in  Fort  Wayne, 
Ind.,  1848 ;  elected  as  a  Whig  to  the  Thir- 
ty-second Congress  (March  4,  1851-March 
3,  1853)  ;  elected  as  a  Republican  to  the 
Thirty-fourth  and  Thirty-fifth  Congresses 
and  served  from  March  4,  1855,  until  his 
death  in  Fort  Wayne,  March  29,  1857. 
His  second  Congressional  race  was  made 
against  Congressman  Ebenezer  M.  Cham- 
berlain, of  Goshen,  who  was  strongly 
opposed  to  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  com- 
promise, but  nevertheless  defeated  as  a 
candidate  for  re-election.  A  fusion  of  the 
Know-Nothings  and  anti-slavery  men 
proved  too  strong  to  be  overcome  by  Judge 
Chamberlain.  " 

[CHAriEK   X\\l 


NDER  the  Constitution  of  1816 
Governor  and  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor only  were  elected  by  the 
people.  Other  State  officers 
were  chosen  by  the  Legislature. 
Up  to  1853  these  several  offi- 
ces were  filled  by  the  gentle- 
men named  under  their  respective  official 
titles  • 


Robert  A.  New from  1816  to  1825 

William  W.  Wick,  .from  1825  to  1829 
James  Morrison  .  .  .  from  1829  to  1833 
William  Sheets  ..  .from  1833  to  1837 
William  J.  Brown,  .from  1837  to  1841 
William  Sheets  .. .  .from  1841  to  1845 
John  H.  Thompson. from  1845  to  1849 

Charles  H.  Test from  1849  to  1853 

William  H.  Lilley.  .from  1816  to  1828 
Benjamin  I.  Blythe.from  1828  to  1829 

Morris  Morris   from  1829  to  1844 

Horatio  J.  Harris,  .from  1844  to  1847 
Douglas  Maguire  .  .from  1847  to  1850 
Erastus  W.H.  Ellis. from  1850  to  1853 

Daniel    C.    Lane.  .  .from  1816  to  1823 

Samuel    Merrill from  1823  to  1835 

Nathan  B.  Palmer. from  1835  to  1841 
George    H.    Dunn,  .from  1841  to  1844 

Royal    Mayhew from  1844  to  1847 

Samuel    Hannah.  .  .  from  1847  to  1850 

•James   P.   Drake.  .  .from  1850  to  1853 


Isaac  Blackford   .  .  .from  1817  to  1850 

(One  of  the  judges.) 
Horace  E.  Carter,  .from  1852  to  1853 



James  Scott from  1816  to  1831 

John  Johnson from  1816  to  1817 

Jesse  L.  Holman. .  .from  1816  to  1831 
Isaac  Blackford  .  .  .from  1817  to  1853 
Stephen  C.  Stephens.. 

from  1831  to  1836 
John  T.  McKinney. from  1831  to  1837 

Charles  Dewey from  1836  to  1847 

Jeremiah  Sullivan,  .from  1837  to  1846 
Samuel  E.  Perkins. from  1846  to  1865 
Thomas  L.  Smith,  .from  1847  to  1853 

The  last  State  Auditor  chosen  by  the 
Legislature,  under  the  1816  constitution, 
was  Dr.  Erastus  W.  H.  Ellis,  for  many 
years  editor  and  publisher  of  the  Goshen 
Democrat.  He  was  one  of  the  truly  able 
men  of  the  State  who  deserved  all  he  ever 
got  from  the  party  which  he  served  so 
ably  for  a  quarter  of  a  century.  He  first 
located  with  his  father  at  Mishawaka, 
then  moved  to  South  Bend,  and  from  there 
to  Elkhart.  This  was  in  1837.  In  Janu- 
ary, 1839,  he  was  induced  by  the  owners 
of  the  Democrat  to  become  its  editor  at  a 
salary  of  $200  a  year  and  board,  which 
amounted  to  two  dollars  a  week.  The  cir- 
culation of  the  Democrat  then  was  about 
400.  During  the  Van  Buren  campaign  in 
1840  Dr.  Ellis  conducted  a  campaign  pa- 
per called  the  Kinderhook  Dutchman.  It 
had  a  circulation  of  1,200.  He  also  issued 
the  St.  Joseph  County  Democrat  during 
the  Van  Buren  campaign.  In  August, 
1841,  he  was  elected  Auditor  of  Elkhart 
county  and  re-elected  in  1846.  This 
proved  quite  helpful  to  him  in  his  news- 
paper career.  He  continued  to  audit  and 
edit  until  January,  1850,  when  the  Legis- 
lature elected  him  to  the  more  lucrative 
position  of  State  Auditor.  During  his 
term  of  office  he,  in  connection  with  John 
S.  Spann,  established  a  weekly  paper 
called  The  Indiana  Statesman.  It  attained 
a  circulation  of  2,000  and  lived  two  years. 
By  reason  of  his  pronounced  anti-slavery 
extension  views  the  Bright  forces  defeated 
him  in  convention  when  he  sought  a  re- 
nomination  for  the  office  of  State  Auditor. 
In  1855  Dr.  Ellis  severed  his  connection 
with  the  Democratic  party.  He  joined  the 
newly  organized  anti-slavery    party,    was 


19  16 

nominated  for  State  Auditor  in  1856,  and 
defeated  with  the  rest  of  the  ticket.  For 
a  while  he  edited  a  campaign  paper  called 
We,  the  People.  It  had  a  circulation  of 
7,000.  He  filled  several  minor  positions 
under  State  authority,  became  very  poor 
and  returned,  penniless,  to  Goshen,  where 
he  was  installed  as  editor  of  the  Goshen 
Times.  In  1858  he  was  again  elected  Au- 
ditor of  Elkhart  county  and  re-elected  in 
1862.  By  Governor  Morton  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  member  of  the  Peace  Commis- 
sion that  was  to  avert  war  between  the 
North  and  South.  He  served  as  Draft 
Commissioner  and  assisted  in  organizing 
troops  for  the  Union  army.  Dr.  Ellis  was 
married  three  times  and  had  an  interest- 
ing family  of  children.  He  died  at  his 
home  in  Goshen  October  10,  1876;  was  at 
the  time  serving  as  postmaster  of  that  in- 
viting little  city. 


Under  the  Constitution  of  1816  the 
Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  were  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor,  such  appoint- 
ment being  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
Senate.  The  appointments  for  the  first 
bench  were  made  by  Governor  Jennings, 
whose  choice  fell  upon  James  Scott,  John 
Johnson  and  Jesse  L.  Holman.  The  fol- 
lowing year  he  named  as  Johnson's  suc- 
cessor Isaac  Blackford,-  who  served  con- 
tinuously from  1817  to  1853 — thirty-six 
years  in  all.  This  is  without  a  parallel  in 
the  history  of  the  State.  His  record  dur- 
ing all  these  eventful  years  entitled  him 
fully  to  every  word  said  in  commendation 
of  his  great  work  by  a  writer  who  knew 
him  well,  William  Wesley  Woollen : 


Thirty-Six  Years  On  the  Supreme  Bench. 

"Isaac  Blackford,  for  thirty-five  years 
a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Indiana, 
was  born  at  Bound  Brook,  Somerset 
county,  N.  J.,  November  6,  1786.  When 
sixteen  years  old  he  entered  Princeton 
College,    from    which,    four   years    after- 

ward, he  graduated  with  honor.  He  then 
commenced  the  study  of  the  law  in  the 
office  of  Colonel  George  McDonald,  where 
he  remained  a  year,  and  then  entered  the 
office  of  Gabriel  Ford,  where  he  continued 
his  legal  studies.  In  1810  he  received  his 
license,  and  two  years  afterward  left  New 
Jersey  and  came  to  Dayton,  Ohio.  He  re- 
mained there  but  a  short  time,  and  then 
came  to  Indiana.  He  stopped  at  Brook- 
ville  a  while,  and  then  went  to  Salem  and 
located.  On  the  organization  of  Washing- 
ton county,  in  1813,  he  was  chosen  its 
first  Clerk  and  Recorder.  The  next  year 
Mr.  Blackford  was  elected  Clerk  of  the 
Territorial  Legislature,  which  office  he  re- 
signed on  being  appointed  Judge  of  the 
First  Judicial  Circuit.  He  then  removed 
to  Vincennes,  and  in  the  fall  of  1815  re- 
signed the  judgeship  and  opened  a  law 
office.  The  next  year,  1816,  he  was  elected 
a  representative  from  the  county  of  Knox 
to  the  first  I^egislature  under  the  State 
government.  There  were  many  men  in 
that  body  who  afterward  became  distin- 
guished in  the  history  of  Indiana,  among 
them  James  Noble,  Amos  Lane,  John 
Dumont,  Williamson  Dunn,  Davis  Floyd, 
Samuel  Milroy  and  Ratlifi"  Boon;  but  even 
at  that  early  day  Judge  Blackford's  repu- 
tation for  judicial  fairness  was  so  well  es- 
tablished that  he  was  chosen  Speaker 
without  a  contest.  The  next  year  Gov- 
ernor Jennings  appointed  him  a  judge  of 
the  Supreme  Court,  a  position  he  graced 
and  honored  for  the  next  thirty-five  years. 

"In  1853,  his  term  as  Supreme  Judge 
having  expired,  he  opened  an  office  at  In- 
dianapolis for  the  practice  of  law.  He 
had  been  so  long  on  the  bench  that  he 
was  ill  at  ease  when  he  went  into  court 
with  a  case.  His  eft'ort  to  get  into  prac- 
tice was  not  successful,  and  in  a  short 
time  he  measurably  abandoned  it. 

"Judge  Blackford  was  not  at  home  at 
the  bar,  and  he  longed  to  be  again  upon 
the  bench.  The  opportunity  soon  came. 
In  1855,  on  the  organization  of  the  Court 
of  Claims  at  Washington,  President  Pierce 
appointed  him  one  of  its  judges.  He  held 
this  office  until  his  death,  December  31, 
1859.  He  discharged  its  duties  in  a  way 
that  added  luster  to  a  name  already  illus- 
trious, and  died  the  best  known  and  most 
eminent  jurist  Indiana  has  ever  produced. 

"When  Judge  Blackford's  death  became 
known  at  Washington  a  meeting  of  the 



18  16-1 

Indiana  Congressional  delegation  was  held 
to  take  action  upon  it.  Albert  G.  Porter, 
then  the  representative  from  the  Indian- 
apolis district,  in  a  speech  delivered  on 
that  occasion,  said: 

It  is  hardly  possible,  sir,  for  persons  who  reside 
in  an  old  community  to  appreciate  the  extent  to 
which,  in  a  new  country,  the  character  of  a  public 
man  may  be  impressed  upon  the  public  mind. 
There  is  not  a  community  in  Indiana,  not  a  single 
one,  in  which  the  name  of  Judge  Blackford  is  not 
a  household  word.  He  has  been  identified  with 
our  State  from  the  beginning.  He  may  almost 
be  said  to  be  a  part  of  our  institutions.  Judicial 
ability,  judicial  purity,  approaching  nearly  to  the 
idea  of  the  divine,  private  worth,  singularly  blend- 
ing the  simplicity  of  childhood  with  the  sober 
gravity  of  age — these  were  represented,  not 
simply  in  the  mind  of  the  profession,  but  in  the 
universal  popular  mind  of  Indiana,  in  the  person 
of  Isaac  Blackford. 

"At  the  same  meeting  General  William 
McKee  Dunn,  then  the  representative  from 
the  Madison  district,  said: 

For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  Judge 
Blackford  occupied  a  seat  on  the  Supreme  Bench 
of  our  State.  He  has  done  more  than  any  other 
man  to  build  up  our  jurisprudence  on  the  broad 
foundation  of  the  common  law-  His  reports  are 
not  only  an  honor  to  him,  but  to  the  State  of 
Indiana  also.  It  has  been  well  said  here  that  he 
was  an  "upright  judge,"  and  not  only  was  he  so 
in  fact,  but  so  careful  was  he  of  his  judicial  char- 
acter, and  so  regardful  of  all  the  proprieties  of 
his  position  that  he  was  universally  I'ecognized 
and  esteemed  as  "an  upright  judge." 

Indiana  is  proud  of  her  great  jurist,  but  to- 
day she  mourns  the  loss  of  one  of  her  most 
eminent  citizens,  and  now  by  her  united  delega- 
tion in  Congress  claims  that  all  that  is  mortal 
of  Isaac  Blackford  may  be  entrusted  to  her  care 
and  have  sepulture  in  her  bosom.  Let  his  body 
be  borne  back  to  the  State  with  whose  judicial 
history  his  name  is  inseparably  connected,  and 
there  at  its  capital  let  him  be  buried,  where  those 
from  all  parts  of  the  State  who  have  so  long 
known,  revered  and  loved  him  may  visit  his  tomb 
and  pay  affectionate  tribute  to  his  memory. 

"On  Thursday,  January  13,  1860,  while 
the  Democratic  State  convention  was  in 
session.  Governor  Willard  announced  to 
the  convention  that  the  remains  of  Judge 
Blackford  had  reached  Indianapolis  and 
were  then  lying  in  the  Senate  Chamber. 
He  also  said  that  the  Judge's  funeral 
would  take  place  that  afternoon,  and  in- 
vited the  delegates  to  view  the  remains 
and  attend  the  funeral. 

"In  1825  Judge  Blackford  was  a  candi- 
date for  Governor  of  Indiana,  but  was  de- 
feated by  James  Brown  Ray  by  a  majority 
of  2,622  votes.     Subsequently   he  was   a 

candidate  for  United  States  Senator,  and 
was  beaten  by  William  Hendricks  by  a 
single  vote. 

"Judge  Blackford  was  very  careful  in 
his  expenditure  of  money.  He  seldom 
parted  with  it  without  an  equivalent. 

"Judge  Blackford  had  an  only  son, 
George,  whose  mother  died  in  giving  him 
birth.  The  father  was  wrapped  up  in  his 
boy.  He  was  not  only  an  only  child,  but 
he  was  the  only  hope  of  perpetuating  the 
Blackford  name.  This  boy,  this  child  and 
companion  of  the  cloisteral  jurist,  sickened 
and  died  while  at  Lexington,  Ky.,  under 
medical  treatment  of  Dr.  Dudley.  His 
father  went  to  Lexington,  and  after  see- 
ing his  boy  laid  away  in  his  tomb,  returned 
to  his  home.  It  was  in  the  summertime, 
and  he  reached  Indianapolis  in  the  middle 
of  the  night.  Instead  of  going  to  his  room 
in  the  Circle,  he  went  to  the  residence  of 
Henry  P.  Coburn,  and,  without  knocking, 
opened  the  door  and  entered  the  house,  a 
house  in  which  he  was  ever  welcome.  Soon 
afterward  one  of  Mr.  Coburn's  sons  was 
awakened  by  the  stifled  sobs  of  the 
mourner.  He  arose  from  his  bed  and, 
lighting  a  candle,  beheld  Judge  Blackford, 
walking  the  floor  and  sobbing  as  though 
his  heart  would  break.  Not  a  word  was 
said.  The  young  man  knew  the  cause  of 
the  great  grief  of  his  father's  friend,  and 
having  no  wish  to  intrude  upon  its  sanc- 
tity, left  the  room.  Judge  Blackford  re- 
mained at  Mr.  Coburn's  for  several  days, 
and  during  the  time  held  no  conversation 
with  anyone.  He  took  his  meals  in  silence, 
and  when  they  were  over  returned  to  his 
room.  When  narrating  this  incident,  Gen- 
eral John  Coburn  said  to  the  author:  'I 
have  seen  grief  in  all  its  forms ;  have  seen 
the  mother  mourning  for  her  son;  have 
seen  the  wife  at  the  grave  of  her  husband, 
and  heard  her  sobs,  but  I  never  saw  such 
appalling  agonv  as  Judge  Blackford  ex- 
hiliited  that  night  at  my  father's  house.' 

"Judge  Blackford  had  a  room  in  the  old 
building  which  used  to  stand  in  the  Gov- 
ernor's Circle,  in  which  he  lived  for  many 
years.  It  was  plainly  furnished,  but  it 
contained  everything  necessary  for  his 

"One  who  knew  him  well  says  he  paid 
as  much  attention  to  a  comma  as  to  a 
thought.  He  has  been  known  to  stop  the 
press  to  correct  the  most  trivial  error,  one 
that  few  would  notice.     The  late  Samuel 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCEACY  —  1816-1 

Judah,  desiring  to  have  a  decision  delayed, 
once  asked  him  the  correct  spelHng  of  a 
word  he  knew  would  be  in  the  opinion. 
The  Judge  answered,  giving  the  usual 
orthography.  Mr.  Judah  took  issue  with 
him  and  argued  that  the  spelling  was  not 
correct.  The  Judge  at  once  commenced 
an  examination  of  the  word,  dug  out  its 
roots  and  carefully  weighed  all  the  au- 
thorities he  could  find.  He  spent  two  days 
at  this  work,  and  before  he  got  through 
the  court  had  adjourned  and  the  case  went 
over  to  the  next  term. 

"In  politics  Judge  Blackford  was  orig- 
inally a  Whig,  but  in  1836  he  supported 
Van  Buren  for  the  Presidency,  and  after- 
ward acted  with  the  Democracy.  He  hated 
slavery,  and  during  his  whole  life  his  in- 
fluence was  against  it.  Although  the 
ordinance  ceding  the  Northwestern  Ter- 
ritory to  the  United  States  provided  that 
slavery  should  never  exist  in  the  Territory 
or  the  States  formed  from  it,  it  was 
covertly  introduced  into  the  Territory. 
Laws  were  passed  authorizing  the  bring- 
ing of  negroes  into  the  Territory  and  pro- 
viding for  apprenticing  males  until  they 
were  thirty-five  years  old  and  females 
until  they  were  thirty-two.  Children  of 
colored  persons  born  in  the  Territory 
might  be  apprenticed  until  the  males  were 
thirty  and  the  females  twenty-eight  years 
old.  It  was  also  provided  that  slaves 
found  ten  miles  from  home  without  per- 
mission of  their  masters  might  be  taken 
up  and  whipped  with  twenty-five  lashes. 
Congress  was  petitioned  to  suspend  the 
sixth  article  of  the  ordinance  of  1787,  pro- 
hibiting slavery  in  the  Territory,  but  hap- 
pily without  effect.  General  Harrison  was 
Governor  of  the  Territory,  and  approved 
of  all  these  measures.  He  had  about  him, 
and  enjoying  his  confidence,  Waller  Tay- 
lor, Thomas  Randolph,  and  other  immi- 
grants from  Virginia,  who  were  pro- 
slavery  men  of  the  most  decided  cast. 
Judge  Blackford  hated  slavery  in  all  its 
forms  and  early  allied  himself  with  the 
free  State  party  led  by  Jonathan  Jennings. 
He  held  General  Harrison  responsible  for 
the  effort  to  make  Indiana  a  slave  Terri- 
tory, and  when  the  General  became  a  can- 
didate for  President,  in  1836,  Judge  Black- 
ford refused  to  support  him.  His  action 
in  this  matter  put  him  outside  the  Whig 
party  and  into  the  Democratic — a  position 
he  maintained  while  he  lived. 

"His  legal  opinions  were  prepared  with 
the  greatest  care  and  precision.  They 
were  written  and  rewritten  until  they  were 
brought  to  his  critical  standard.  So,  too, 
with  his  reports  of  the  decisions  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  eight  volumes  of  which 
he  published.  Each  syllabus  was  wrought 
out  as  a  sculptor  chisels  his  marble.  He 
did  not  report  all  the  decisions  of  the 
court;  many  were  omitted.  Those  only 
were  published  which  he  regarded  as  sound 
and  just  on  the  general  principles  of  the 
law.  The  result  of  this  was  his  reports 
are  authority  wherever  the  courts  recog- 
nize the  common  law  as  their  rule  of  action. 
Since  they  were  published  a  law  has  been 
passed  compelling  a  report  of  all  the  opin- 
ions of  the  court.  There  have  been  so 
many  contradictory  opinions  given  since 
then  that  the  authority  of  our  highest 
court  is  not,  relatively,  as  high  as  it  was 
when  its  decisions  were  only  known 
through  Blackford's  Reports.  Judge  Black- 
ford's reports  were  short  and  sententious, 
his  style  being  clear  and  faultless.  He  did 
not  write  essays  or  treatises  in  his  opin- 
ions, but  treated  of  the  essence  of  the 
case,  and  of  nothing  more. 

"Without  favor,  fear  or  affection  he  held 
up  the  scales  of  justice  before  the  world. 
His  spotless  rectitude  and  unswerving  jus- 
tice made  his  name  a  household  word  in 
Indiana,  a  State  whose  judicature  he  found 
in  swaddling  clothes  and  left  clad  in  beau- 
tiful raiment." 


Judges  Scott  and  Holman  were  by  Gov- 
ernor Ray  denied  reappointment  in  1830 
on  account  of  their  refusal  to  aid  that  am- 
bitious public  functionary  in  his  effort  to 
secure  a  seat  in  the  United  States  Senate. 
Stephen  C.  Stephens,  a  pronounced  Aboli- 
tionist, and  John  T.  McKinney,  a  Whig, 
were  named  as  successors.  Both  encoun- 
tered considerable  opposition  to  their  con- 
firmation, but  the  Governor  finally  won 
out.  Dewey  and  Sullivan  were  generally 
considered  strong  jurists.  Governor 
Whitcomb  named  Judges  Perkins  and 
Smith,  both  of  whom  adorned  the  bench. 

So  far  as  Judge  Holman  was  concerned 
his  retirement  from  the  Supreme  Bench  of 
the  State  did  not  prove  a  detriment.  Three 



1  6  -  1  9  1  G 

or  four  years  afterward  (in  1835)  Presi- 
dent Jackson  appointed  him  as  Judge  of 
the  United  States  Circuit  Court  for  In- 
diana. He  was  the  second  judge  of  the 
court  and  served  until  his  death,  on  March 
28,  1842.  Judge  Holman  was  a  native  of 
Danville,  Ky.,  being  born  in  that  city  Oc- 
tober 24,  1784.  He  received  a  common 
school  education  in  Kentucky  and  then 
studied  law  under  Henry  Clay  at  Lexing- 
ton. At  the  age  of  twenty-six  he  moved  to 
Indiana  and  .settled  for  life  on  a  farm  near 
Aurora.  He  was  one  of  the  very  first  men 
in  the  State  to  bring  his  slaves  (inherited 
by  his  wife)  across  the  Ohio  river  and 
emancipate  them.     In  1811  he  was  Prose- 

cuting Attorney,  and  in  1814  became  a 
member  of  the  Territorial  Legislature.  In 
1881  he  was  an  unsuccessful  candidate  for 
United  States  Senator,  being  defeated  by 
John  Tipton  by  one  vote.  He  is  described 
as  a  particularly  careful,  laborious,  exact 
judge.  It  is  said  that  a  more  conscientious 
man  never  lived.  He  had  no  enemies  and 
he  yet  never  shirked  a  duty.  Judge  Hol- 
man loved  nature  and  books  and  was  a 
preacher  of  the  gospel.  In  denominational 
attiliation  he  was  a  Baptist.  He  was  the 
father  of  William  S.  Holman,  for  many 
years  the  ever-faithful  and  vigilant  watch- 
dog of  the  nation's  treasury. 

(  123  ) 

[Chapter  XVI.] 



AKING    a    retrospective    view, 

'T'l  measuring  discerningly  and 
I  I  dispassionately  the  achieve- 
1  11  ments  of  American  statesman- 
ship during  the  first  half  cen- 
tury of  the  Republic's  exist- 
ence, there  is  presented  to  the 
appreciative  eye  this  inspiring  picture  of 


Territory  Year       Sq.  Miles  Price 

Louisiana  1803  875,025  $15,000,000 

Florida  1819  70,107  5,499,768 

Texas   1845  389,795     * 

Oregon 1846  288,689     * 

Me.\ican  cession 1848  523,802  18,250,000 

Gadsden  purchase 1854  36,211  10,000,000 

*Annexed  by  treaty. 

In  striking  contrast  to  Europe's  history 
of  territorial  aggrandizement  is  the  record 
of  the  growth  of  the  United  States.  Not 
a  piece  of  land  has  been  added  to  our  do- 
main unless  compensation  in  some  kind 
was  made. 

But  not  only  in  its  acquisition  of  terri- 
tory has  the  United  States  proved  its  high 
national  morality  to  the  congress  of  na- 
tions. In  every  international  affair  in 
which  we  have  participated  we  have 
shown  a  regard  for  weaker  nations,  and  a 
disregard  for  the  opinions  of  strong  ones. 

The  history  of  the  relations  between  the 
United  States  and  Great  Britain  in  the 
last  hundred  years  is  a  testament  to  the 
efficiency  of  arbitration,  when  two  nations 
really  desire  a  peaceful  settlement.  The 
disputes  over  the  Maine  boundary,  the 
fishery  claims,  the  Oregon  dispute,  the 
Klondike  frontier  difference,  the  regula- 
tion of  pelagic  sealing,  were  all  of  as  much 

importance — commercially,  economically 
or  geographically — as  the  causes  of  most 
any  war  in  that  same  time. 

The  first  territorial  acquisition  of  the 
United  States  was  that  of  Louisiana  from 
France.  It  was  the  largest  real  estate 
deal  ever  accomplished  by  friendly  na- 
tions. The  United  States  paid  approxi- 
mately $15,000,000  for  more  than  875,000 
square  miles  of  territory. 

Spain  had  acquired  Louisiana  in  1763 
when  France  retired  from  America.  It 
controlled  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi 
river,  the  free  passage  of  which  early  be- 
came a  point  of  dispute  with  the  United 
States.  By  1802  a  temporary  settlement 
was  made,  when  the  United  States  learned 
of  the  secret  treaty  of  San  Ildefonso, 
whereby  Spain  gave  Louisiana  back  to 

More  disputes  about  the  river  followed. 
Feeling  ran  high  in  the  new  Republic. 
Jingoes  advocated  war  with  France  to 
force  better  treatment.  President  Jeffer- 
son believed  France  might  be  persuaded 
to  sell  the  island  of  New  Orleans  and  that 
strip  of  the  present  Mississippi  and  Ala- 
bama between  the  thirty-first  parallel  and 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  The  boundary  of  the 
United  States  then  stopped  at  the  thirty- 
first  parallel. 

Robert  R.  Livingston,  the  American 
minister  in  Paris,  was  in.structed  to  pro- 
pose that  matter  to  Napoleon,  then  first 
Consul.'  James  Monroe  was  sent  to  as- 
sist Mr.  Livingston.  France  received  the 
proposal  with  disfavor.  War  talk  was 
heard  again  in  the  United  States,  when 
suddenly  Napoleon,  through  Talleyrand 
and  Marquis  de  Marbois,  his  minister  of 




finance,  offered  to  sell  to  the  Republic  not 
only  the  island  and  small  strip  of  land,  but 
the  entire  province  of  Louisiana. 

The  first  price  asked  was  120,000,000 
francs,  with  the  assumption  of  all  the 
province's  debts  by  the  purchaser.  Amer- 
ica might  have  bought  at  that  price,  but 
as  Napoleon  was  anxious  to  replenish  his 
war  chest  to  fight  England,  he  lowered  his 
terms.  Ultimately  the  price  was  fixed  at 
$15,000,000,  and  April  30,  1803,  the  prov- 
ince of  Louisiana  became  American. 

The  wording  of  the  treaty  conveying 
Louisiana  was  vague,  and  soon  the  United 
States  became  embroiled  with  Spain  over 
the  strip  between  the  gulf  and  the  thirty- 
first  parallel.  Spain  claimed  that  terri- 
tory belonged  to  Florida,  then  a  Spanish 
province,  and  had  never  been  retrans- 
ferred  to  France. 

Spain  maintained  its  position,  and  in 
1810  the  inhabitants  of  the  western  part 
of  the  strip  rebelled,  organized  an  inde- 
pendent republic  and  then  asked  to  be  an- 
nexed to  the  United  States.  American 
troops  took  possession  without  any  an- 
nexation formalities.  In  1812  the  area  of 
American  control  was  extended  farther 
East.  After  England  used  Florida  for  a 
military  base  in  the  war  of  1812,  the  dis- 
pute between  Spain  and  the  United  States 
became  more  acute,  and  finally  a  confer- 
ence was  held  to  adjust  all  difficulties. 

It  resulted  in  Florida  being  ceded  to  the 
United  States,  Spain  releasing  all  claim  to 
the  strip  mentioned  before.  In  return  the 
United  States  agreed  to  take  over  all 
claims  of  American  citizens  against  Spain 
up  to  $5,000,000  and  pay  some  expenses 
and  debts  of  the  province,  all  aggregating 
about  $5,500,000.  The  United  States  also 
gave  up  its  claim  to  some  territory  west 
of  the  Sabine  river  in  the  present  Texas. 

The  United  States  made  several  efforts 
to  acquire  Texas  before  it  was  annexed. 
In  1827  an  offer  of  $1,000,000  was  made. 
Two  years  later  $5,000,000  were  offered. 

Mexico  refused.  In  1836  the  Mexican 
provinces  of  Texas  and  Coahuila  seceded 
and  organized  an  independent  republic 
under  the  name  of  Texas.  It  tried  repeat- 
edly to  enter  the  United  States,  but  not 
until  1845  was  the  annexation  completed 
and  the  Republic  of  Texas  disestablished. 
No  money  was  paid  for  Texas,  but  the 
people  of  the  State  were  rewarded  by  the 
increased  protection  they  enjoyed  as  a 
part  of  the  United  States.  Later  the  State 
was  paid  $10,000  for  lands  ceded  to  the 
general  Government  in  the  adjustment  of 
its  boundaries. 

With  Texas  the  United  States  also 
acquired  a  quarrel  with  Mexico  over  the 
territory  between  the  Rio  Grande  and 
Nueces  river.  The  Texas  declaration  of 
independence  had  named  the  Rio  Grande 
as  the  southwestern  boundary.  Mexico 
claimed  the  more  northern  stream  was 
correct.  The  United  States  chose  to  up- 
hold the  Texas  contention,  which  brought 
on  the  Mexican  war  of  1846-48. 

Uncle  Sam's  action  in  that  war  rather 
smacks  of  conquest,  but  he  sugar-coated 
the  forcible  seizure  of  New  Mexico  and 
California  by  paying  Mexico  for  them. 
The  price  was  $18,250,000,  $3,250,000  of 
which  was  to  liquidate  spoliation  claims 
of  American  citizens  against  Mexico. 

Some  writers  have  tried  to  show  that 
the  United  States  contemplated  only  seiz- 
ing the  strip  between  the  Nueces  and  Rio 
Grande  when  the  war  began,  but  the  ex- 
igencies of  the  struggle  made  it  necessary 
to  take  other  land.  Such  attempts  are 
futile.  The  United  States  took  California 
and  New  Mexico  by  force,  justifying  its 
action  by  the  knowledge  that  a  great  rich 
region  was  kept  undeveloped  by  a  back- 
ward nation,  and  paying  a  gold  compensa- 
tion. Had  a  European  nation  been  in 
Uncle  Sam's  place  in  1848,  Mexico  would 
have  been  stripped  not  only  of  land,  for 
which  it  was  paid,  but  money  as  well. 
Mexico  was  paid  $3,000,000  down  and 
$12,000,000  in  four  annual  payments. 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191   « 

During  the  Mexican  war  the  United 
States  also  acquii-ed  clear  title  to  another 
large  and  valuable  tract  of  land — Oregon 
Territory.  England  laid  some  claim  to  it, 
but  an  arbitration  conference  awarded  it 
to  the  United  States  in  1846. 

In  1854  the  United  States  made  its  last 
acquisition  of  contiguous  territory.  In 
that  year  a  strip  of  land,  now  known  as 
the  Gadsden  purchase,  was  acquired. 
Mexico  was  given  $10,000,000  for  it,  an 
excellent  price.  It  provided  a  way  for  a 
trans-continental  railroad. 

The  contemplation  of  such  a  record  is 
well  calculated  to  arouse  in  Democratic 
breasts  a  spirit  of  exuberance  and  exulta- 
tion. With  pardonable  pride  it  may  be  re- 
ferred to  as  a  splendid  vindication  of 
Democratic  judgment  and  fortitude  in 
holding  out  determinedly  against  the 
whimsical,  hysterical  and  at  times  vicious 
attitude  of  the  Whigs  in  opposing  both  the 
annexation  of  Texas  and  the  war  against 
Mexico.  Steering  clear  of  that  which 
might  be  considered  vainglorious  boastful- 
ness,  there  is  abundant  justification  for 
bringing  to  popular  attention  the  magni- 
tude of  that  marvelous  territorial  expan- 
sion under  which  a  mighty  nation  thrives 
and  prospers  between  two  great  oceans. 
In  fitting  terms  the  splendor  of  this 
achievement  is  vividly  brought  within  the 
grasp  and  comprehension  of  the  present 
generation  by  a  veteran  Democratic  jour- 
nalist who  for  many  years  championed 
and  vitalized  Democratic  doctrines  in  In- 
diana. His  admirable  production  richly 
merits  a  conspicuous  place  in  this  volume : 


(By  Major  Geo.  E.  Finney,  Editor  of  the 
Martinsville  Democrat.) 

"There  are  times  and  occasions  when 
opponents  of  Democracy  opprobriously  ap- 
ply such  terms  as  'Bourbon,'  'negative 
quantity,'  and  'unprogressive  plodders'  to 
the  party  that  prides  itself  as  having  had 
Thomas  Jefferson  as  its  founder.  By  way 
of  rejoinder  it  may  be  said  that  in  only 

one  particular  are  the  Democrats  Bour- 
bons. They  early  learned  and  imbibed  the 
spirit  of  the  constitution.  Its  meaning  in 
the  early  days  is  in  no  different  from 
its  meaning  now.  To  that  instrument 
they  have  clung  through  all  the  changing 
years.  As  to  it  they  have  learned  nothing 
new,  nor  have  they  forgotten  its  spirit  and 
its  teachings.  Thus  far  and  no  farther 
are  they  Bourbons. 

"A  'negative  party'?  Let's  see.  It  put 
its  impress  upon  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence; it  materially  assisted  in  orig- 
inating the  Government,  providing  those 
wise  measures  and  supporting  them  em- 
bodied in  the  constitution  under  which  the 
country  has  passed  through  one  hundred 
and  twenty-five  years  of  unexampled  pros- 
perity and  happiness;  under  which  the 
country  has  been  brought  safely  through 
every  trouble  that  is  likely  to  frown  upon 
us,  and  under  which,  aided  by  superb 
statesmanship,  indomitable  courage  and 
confidence  in  man's  ability  for  a  patriotic 
self-government,  it  has  avoided  the  rock 
upon  which  other  countries  have  split. 
While  these  are  material  achievements 
whose  influence  envelop  us  by  night  and 
make  the  air  around  us  pure  Isy  day,  they 
are  not  such  things  as  those  upon  which 
a  measure  may  be  put  and  their  value  cal- 
culated by  dollars  and  cents,  or  their  ex- 
tent measured  by  leagues  and  furlongs. 
But  the  party  is  to  be  credited  with  large 
achievements  of  this  character,  too,  as — 

"Take  a  map  of  the  United  States,  trace 
a  line  beginning  near  Fernandina,  Fla.,  on 
the  north  line  of  that  State,  west,  with  an 
offset  to  the  north  at  Chattahoochee  river 
to  the  Mississippi,  thence  with  that  river 
to  its  source,  and  over  a  stretch  of  coun- 
try still  further  north  till  the  line  inter- 
sects Rainy  Lake  river,  near  its  issuance 
from  the  Lake  of  the  Woods ;  from  this 
point  east  along  the  lake  line,  St.  Lawrence 
river  and  the  northeast  boundary  to  the 
ocean,  thence  along  the  coast  line  to  the 
place  of  beginning.  Within  this  boundary 
is  found  the  original  area  of  the  United 
States,  embracing  827,080  square  miles  of 

"The  total  area  in  square  miles  of  the 
United  States  (excluding  Florida  and 
Alaska)  is  2,967,226.  Deduct  from  this 
grand  total  the  original  area,  in  .square 
miles  thus— 2,967,226  minus  827,080,  and 
there  results  2,180,146.  These  figures 
represent  the  territory  which,  through  the 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1 

clear  foresight  and  the  splendid  diplomacy 
of  the  Democratic  party,  was  acquired 
and,  without  war  or  conquest,  added  to 
this  country. 

"Though  Florida  was  acquired  by  pur- 
chase as  a  result  of  a  compromise  on  the 
Rio  Grande-Sabine  river  boundary  line 
dispute  under  a  Democratic  President,  yet 
it  is  excluded  from  the  count  for  the  rea- 
son that  the  purchase  was  accomplished 
during  the  'era  of  good  feeling' — a  notable 
period  when  no  political  parties  were  bat- 
tling for  supremacy — and  therefore  the 
Democracy  is  not  entitled  to  exclusive 
credit.  Nor  is  Alaska,  because  that  icicle 
was  the  gift  of  the  Republican  party.  But 
all  the  contiguous  accessions  besides  the 
Democratic  party  gave  to  the  country,  and 
all  of  this  splendid  heritage  was  acquired 
in  the  face  of  opposition,  some  of  it  reach- 
ing if  not  to  treasonable,  at  least  to  most 
unpatriotic,  utterances. 

"A  magnificent  domain  in  itself!  Its 
northern  boundary  stretches  out  for  six- 
teen hundred  miles  before  reaching  the 
Pacific;  its  coast  line  eighteen  hundred 
miles;  its  southern  line  two  thousand 
miles,  and  its  river  line  the  whole  length 
of  the  Mississippi  and  more.  Within  this 
boundary  is  found  a  land  of  varied  condi- 
tion, but  most  of  which  contains  elements 
of  wealth  to  the  people  and  to  the  Gov- 
ernment. Its  auriferous  ores  glisten  in 
the  eyes  of  the  world ;  the  products  of  its 
grazing  grounds  reach  the  sea  and  cross 
it;  its  golden  cereal  is  quoted  in  the  world's 
great  marts;  its  luscious  fruits  gladden 
the  palates  of  the  peoples  of  many  climes, 
and  its  grand  scenery  attracts  the  lovers 
of  the  beautiful  from  far  and  near.  Upon 
every  league  of  this  vast  expanse — from 
the  mouth  of  the  Father  of  Waters  to  the 
far-away  Cape  Flattery,  from  the  Gila  to 
the  Lake  of  the  Woods — the  Democratic 
footprint  is  seen  and  the  sign-manual  of 
the  party  of  Jefi'erson  is  writ  in  characters 
of  unfading  glory. 

"The  area  of  accessions  is  more  than 
two  and  a  half  times  larger  than  the  orig- 
inal country,  conquered  from  England.  In 
a  national  sense  the  value  of  this  achieve- 
ment cannot  be  computed,  but  a  few 
minutes'  thought  will  open  the  mind  to  its 
vast  importance.  In  the  absence  of  this 
addition  of  territory,  the  Mississippi  and 
an  imaginary  line  north  of  its  source 
would  have  been  its  boundary  on  the  west, 
and  the  great  breadth  of  lands  between  it 

and  the  Pacific  coast  owned  and  occupied 
by  foreign  peoples.  He  that  has  read  his- 
tory, even  very  recent  history,  will  recog- 
nize at  once  the  danger  of  such  a  line  in 
case  of  trouble  with  national  neighbors, 
and  the  cost  of  maintaining  defenses  along 
such  a  stretch  of  boundary,  both  in  times 
of  peace  as  well  as  war.  I'he  clear  fore- 
sight of  Jefferson  appreciated  this  danger 
and  sought  to  avert  it.  Again,  to  our 
country  had  been  invited  the  oppressed 
people  of  other  nations  to  find  asylum  and 
home  within  our  borders.  And  the  people 
came.  It  was  easy  enough  to  see  that  in 
the  coming  years  more  territory  would  be 
needed,  and  this  thought  added  strength 
to  the  purpose. 

"Following  in  the  steps  of  Jefferson,  the 
later  Democracy  saw  safety,  national 
security  and  commercial  value  in  pushing 
the  boundary  farther  west,  for  on  the  sea 
line  a  boundary  was  to  be  found,  secure 
in  its  permanency,  dependable  in  its 
strength  and  economical  in  its  keep,  in 
that  it  would  require  few  fortifications 
and  its  liability  to  incursions  be  negligible. 
It  requires  little  fancy  to  conjure  up  the 
succession  of  quarrels,  brawls,  raids  and 
disturbances  of  various  kinds  that  always 
characterize  the  people  along  such  a 
boundary  as  that  which  Jefferson 
saw.  As  a  testimony  to  this  con- 
template the  late  and  present  con- 
dition on  our  Mexican  border.  Then 
would  we  sigh  with  a  vain  regret 
over  the  'what  might  have  been'  if  the 
tide  had  been  taken  at  its  flood.  But, 
thanks  to  the  Democratic  party,  such 
imaginings  were  anticipated.  The  wis- 
dom of  its  leaders  dictated  the  course  that 
was  to  redound  to  the  glory  and  welfare 
of  the  Nation.  Schooled  in  the  revolution, 
their  minds  expanded  with  the  happy  close 
of  the  great  struggle,  and  they  saw  with  a 
prescient  eye  the  grand  possibilities  of 
the  years  to  come. 

"When  the  young  man  has  studied  the 
parties  with  a  view  to  choosing  party- 
affiliations,  and  has,  as  well  as  he  may, 
mastered  the  principles  and  policies  of  the 
contending  parties  of  today,  he  will  feel 
a  pride  in  allying  himself  with  the  De- 
mocracy. In  the  contemplation  of  its 
grand  and  worthy  past,  he  will  feel  that 
he  has  in  some  sort  a  part  and  parcel  in 
its  grand  achievements." 



-  1 


Viewing  with  supreme  satisfaction  the 
events  that  brought  about  the  immense  ex- 
pansion of  Uncle  Sam's  territory,  it  may 
not  be  amiss  to  note  the  predictions  of  woe 
that  were  elicited  as  a  result  of  the  firm 
stand  taken  by  the  statesmen  who  cham- 
pioned the  policy  of  a  greater  American 
Union.  After  the  occupation  of  California 
by  the  United  States,  Sidney  Smith  pre- 
dicted that  "This  marks  the  end  of  the 
great  American  Republic,  for  a  people 
spread  over  such  a  vast  area,  having  such 
diversified  interests  and  separated  by  such 
natural  barriers,  cannot  hold  together." 

His  logic  was  perfect  and  his  conclu- 
sions eminently  correct,  but  for  a  totally 
unexpected  occurrence — the  invention  of 
the  telegraph.  The  telegraph  was  in  use 
then,  but  no  one  saw  even  dimly  its  possi- 

The  necessity  of  binding  together  the 
peoples  of  vast  nations  by  means  of  rapid 
communication  had  been  worrying  the 
world  for  some  time.  The  Russian  gov- 
ernment went  so  far  as  to  build  220  sema- 
phore towers  from  the  Russian  frontier  to 
St.  Petersburg,  by  way  of  Warsaw,  1,200 
miles.  Thirteen  hundred  operators  were 
employed,  and  a  semaphore,  on  the  plan  of 
the  present  railway  signal,  but  with  many 
more  arms,  was  used. 

In  1832  similar  systems  were  in  use  in 
France  and  Prussia  and  one  word  could  be 
signaled  from  Paris  to  Toulon,  475  miles, 
in  twelve  minutes.  These  systems  were 
hardly  established,  at  tremendous  expense, 
when  Professor  Morse  knocked  them  into 
a  cocked  hat. 

What  a  howl  was  raised  when  Jeffer- 
son consummated  the  celebrated  Louisiana 
Territory  purchase.  When  its  ratification 
came  up  in  Congress  Josiah  Quincy  of 
Massachusetts  rose  and  tore  hair.  Jeffer- 
son was  an  "idiot"  and  a  "madman,"  and 

Massachusetts  was  going  to  secede  if  this 
monkey  business  went  any  further. 

"This  constitution  never  was  intended 
to  be  and  never  can  be  strained  to  lay  all 
over  the  wilderness  of  the  West  without 
essentially  affecting  the  rights  and  con- 
sciences of  its  proprietors,"  he  declared. 
"Why,  sir,  I  have  heard  of  six  new  States, 
and  some  say  there  will  be,  at  no  great  dis- 
tance of  time,  more.  It  was  not  for  them 
that  this  constitution  was  adopted.  You 
have  no  authority  to  throw  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  people  of  the  United  States 
into  a  hotchpot  with  the  wild  men  on  the 
Missouri,  or  the  mixed,  though  more  re- 
spectable, Anglo-Hispano-Gallo-Americans 
who  bask  on  the  sands  of  the  Mississippi. 
New  States  are  intended  to  be  formed  be- 
yond the  Mississippi.  There  is  no  limit  to 
man's  imagination  on  this  subject  short 
of  California  and  the  Columbia  river." 
The  "wild  men  on  the  Missouri"  con- 
stitute a  mighty  foi'ce.  They  are  an  im- 
portant factor  in  the  galaxy  of  States. 
Their  number  is  counted  by  millions.  But 
please  don't  judge  harshly  of  Josiah 
Quincy.  How  could  he,  in  the  days  of  his 
activity,  have  foreseen  the  networks  of 
railroads,  the  myriads  of  telegraph  poles 
and  wires,  the  wondrous  performance  of 
the  telephone  and  the  other  cords  which 
are  yet  to  make  the  Columbia  and  the 
Hudson  next  door  neighbors? 

Viewing  ever  so  kindly  and  consider- 
ately the  dire  predictions  made  by  some  of 
the  sages  of  the  remote  past,  let  us  not  lose 
sight  of  the  comforting  fact  that  not  a 
single  slave  territory  or  new  slave  State 
was  carved  out  of  all  the  vast  territory  an- 
nexed and  acquired  from  Mexico !  Verily, 
poor  prophets  were  the  politicians  and 
statesmen  who,  in  those  days,  protested  so 
vehemently  against  the  expansion  cham- 
pioned and  accomplished  by  the  party  of 
Jefferson,  Jackson  and  Polk. 


[Chapter  XVII.] 



AKING  into  consideration  the 
fact  that  the  framers  of  In- 
diana's first  constitution  re- 
quired only  nineteen  days 
wherein  to  perform  the  task 
assigned  to  them,  it  must  be 
conceded  that  they  quite  suc- 
ceeded in  meeting  the  wishes  of  the  people 
whom  they  served.  Provision  had  been 
made  in  that  document  for  subsequent 
changes  at  relatively  short  intervals,  yet 
the  people  indicated  their  unwillingness  to 
avail  themselves  of  that  privilege  by  wait- 
ing thirty-five  years  before  they  sup- 
planted the  old  with  the  new. 

The  assumption  is  thus  warranted  that 
the  men  who  made  the  Constitution  of 
1816  did  a  good  job,  not  alone  for  the  im- 
mediate present  and  the  near  future,  but 
for  a  succeeding  generation.  Moreover, 
their  product  must  have  given  unfeigned 
satisfaction  to  the  wise  men  at  Washing- 
ton, in  congress  assembled,  for  that  august 
body  not  only  placed  its  stamp  of  approval 
upon  the  newly-made  constitution,  but  re- 
lieved the  people  of  the  infant  common- 
wealth of  the  necessity  of  passing  thereon 
by  popular  vote.  That  no  false  notion  may 
find  lodgment  in  the  Hoosier  mind  as  to 
this  having  been  an  exhibition  of  parti- 
ality and  favoritism  the  further  statement 
is  vouchsafed  that  Ohio  at  the  time  of  its 
admission  into  the  Union  was  favored  in 
like  manner.  Congress  evidently  believed 
in  those  days  that  when  the  people  of  a 
Territory  knocking  for  admission  into  the 
Union  are  authorized  to  select  the  men 
charged  with  the  framing  of  their  future 
organic  law,  such  selection  ought  to  be 
made  with  the  understanding  that  their 
acts  shall  be  final  and  not  subject  to  ap- 
proval or  rejection  by  the  populace. 

That  this  belief  was  founded  upon  rea- 
son and  sound  judgment  is  evidenced  by 
the  excellence  of  the  work  actually  done. 
Both  Ohio  and  Indiana  got  along  very  well 
for  many  years  with  their  respective  State 
constitutions,  though  neither  document 
had  first  been  submitted  to  popular  vote. 

Whether  the  Constitution  of  1851  is  a 
marked  improvement  upon  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1816  is  neither  the  purpose  nor  the 
province  of  this  publication  to  determine. 
There  is  just  one  phase  to  which  attention 
is  being  directed,  and  that  is  whether  the 
welfare  of  the  State  was  enhanced  by 
making  State  officers  other  than  Governor 
and  Lieutenant-Governor  elective  by  the 
people.  To  reach  a  just  conclusion  with 
reference  to  this,  let  comparisons  be  insti- 
tuted and  let  the  verdict  be  rendered  in 
conformity  with  actual  experience — the 
only  real  test.  The  question  to  be  passed 
upon  is  whether  a  better  class  of  men  have 
been  chosen  for  Secretary  of  State,  Au- 
ditor and  Treasurer  under  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1851  than  were  chosen  under  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  of  1816? 

Discussion  of  the  relative  merits  of  the 
two  methods  of  choosing  State  officials  has 
developed  a  pronounced  .sentiment  in  favor 
of  the  system  in  operation  in  Pennsylvania 
since  the  adoption  of  that  State's  new  con- 
stitution in  1872.  To  Charles  R.  Buck- 
alew,  for  many  years  the  idolized  leader 
of  the  Keystone  Democracy,  is  mainly  due 
the  credit  for  having  brought  about  the 
change  under  consideration.  In  all  its  hi.s- 
tory,  Penn.sylvania  never  had  a  long  list  of 
State  officers  to  choose  by  popular  vote. 
Under  the  present  system  the  people  of 
Pennsylvania  elect  only  four  State  officers, 
to  wit:  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor, 
Treasurer     and     Secretary     of     Internal 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

Affairs,  besides  Judges  of  the  Supreme 
and  Appellate  Courts.  Secretary  of  State, 
Auditor,  Attorney-General,  Superintend- 
ent of  Public  Instruction,  etc.,  are  all  ap- 
pointed by  the  Governor.  These  officials 
constitute  the  Governor's  Cabinet.  This 
Cabinet  is,  in  so  far  as  feasible,  patterned 
after  the  President's  Cabinet  at  Washing- 
ton. It  has  worked  excellently  in  Penn- 
sylvania, so  much  so  that  during  a  period 
covering  four  decades  not  even  a  sugges- 
tion has  been  ventured  to  supplant  it  vi^ith 
some  other  plan  or  system.  The  official 
business  of  the  State  is  transacted  far 
more  expeditiously  and  efficiently  than 
under  the  elective  system,  and  the  Gov- 
ernor is  afforded  far  greater  opportunity 
to  devote  his  time  and  attention  to  mat- 
ters properly  pertaining  to  his  office  than 
is  possible  in  our  State.  If  enlightenment 
on  this  subject  is  needed,  let  any  one  spend 
a  day  at  the  State  House  at  Indianapolis 
and  make  note  of  the  innumerable  trivial 
things  that  are  from  day  to  day  thrust 
upon  the  attention  of  Governor  Ralston. 
Under  the  so-called  Federal  (or  cabinet) 
plan  all  matters  are  referred  to  the  proper 
department  and  attended  to  by  the  proper 
person.  Three  or  four  of  our  Indiana 
Governors  have  had  their  lives  shortened 
by  the  tremendous  pressure  brought  on 
them  as  a  result  of  the  onerous  and  de- 
structive system  in  vogue  at  our  State 

But  the  real  purpose  of  these  pages  is 
to  record  the  manner  and  circumstances 
under  which  the  Constitution  of  1816  was 
discarded  and  the  Constitution  of  1851 
brought  into  existence.  As  tersely  set 
forth  in  Moore's  "A  Century  of  Indiana," 
the  change  was  brought  about  for  these 
reasons  and  in  this  manner: 

"Feeling  that  the  State  had  outgrown 
its  first  constitution,  and  the  need  of  many 
changes  being  apparent,  the  people  voted 
affirmatively  in  1850  upon  a  proposition 
to  call  a  constitutional  convention.  The 
convention  convened  at  Indianapolis,  Oc- 
tober 7,  1850,  and  continued  in  session  un- 

til February  10,  1851.  It  was  composed 
of  one  hundred  and  fifty  delegates,  and 
the  wisdom  of  their  work  in  framing  a 
new  constitution  is  generally  recognized. 
The  constitution  framed  and  adopted  by 
the  convention  was  later  ratified  by  the 
people  at  the  polls  and  became  the  funda- 
mental law  of  the  State.  It  went  into 
effect  November  1,  1851.  The  vote  upon 
its  adoption  stood — 109,310  yeas  and  26,- 
755  nays.  A  separate  ballot  was  taken  on 
the  thirteenth  article,  which  resulted  in  its 
adoption  by  substantially  the  same  vote. 

"The  thirteenth  article  forbade  the  com- 
ing into  the  State  of  any  negro  or  mulatto ; 
made  contracts  entered  into  with  any  such 
void  and  provided  fines  against  citizens 
who  should  employ  or  otherwise  encour- 
age negroes  to  remain  in  the  State.  Fines 
so  assessed  were  to  be  set  aside  as  a  fund 
for  colonizing  any  negroes  already  in  the 
State,  or  their  descendants,  who  should  be 
willing  to  immigrate.  This  article  was 
stricken  out  by  an  amendment  ratified  by 
vote  of  the  people  in  1881. 

"The  new  constitution  also  limited  the 
suffrage  to  white  voters  and  provided  that 
only  white  males  over  the  age  of  twenty- 
one  years  should  be  considered  in  fixing 
the  basis  of  representation  in  the  General 
Assembly.  By  amendments  adopted  in 
1881  the  word  'white'  was  stricken  out 
wherever  it  appeared  in  the  constitution, 
thus  ending  discrimination  between  the 
races  and  admitting  the  negro  to  the  fran- 
chise and  full  rights  of  citizenship. 

"Among  the  important  changes  made 
by  the  new  constitution  from  the  provi- 
sions of  the  old  were:  The  power  of  ap- 
pointing supreme  court  judges  was  tak- 
en from  the  Governor,  and  all  judicial  offi- 
cers were  made  elective  by  the  people ;  the 
Secretary,  Treasurer  and  Auditor  of  State 
were  made  elective  by  the  people  instead 
of  by  the  Legislature;  sessions  of  the 
Legislature  were  made  biennial  instead  of 
annual;  the  Legislature  was  forbidden  to 
pass  local  or  special  laws ;  a  system  of  gen- 
eral banking  laws  was  provided  for  and 
the  State  prohibited  from  becoming  a 
stockholder  in  any  banking  or  other  corpo- 

The  making  or  amending  of  a  constitu- 
tion has  for  years  engaged  popular  atten- 
tion in  Indiana  to  such  an  extent  that  a 
complete  history  of  the  circumstances  at- 
tending the  creation  of  the  present  organic 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1 

law  will  surely  be  highly  prized  by  every 
reader  of  this  volume,  especially  when 
mention  is  made  that  this  historical  re- 
view emanates  from  the  pen  of  Prof.  Lo- 
gan Esarey  of  the  University  of  Indiana : 


"By  the  terms  of  the  Constitution  of 
1816  it  was  provided  that  every  twelve 
years  a  referendum  vote  should  be  taken 
on  the  advisability  or  necessity  of  calling 
a  constitutional  convention.  It  was  the 
generally  accepted  theory  then,  as  laid 
down  in  the  writings  of  Jefferson,  that  one 
generation  had  no  moral  or  legal  right  to 
bind  by  constitutional  limitation  a  suc- 
ceeding generation.  It  is  hardly  probable 
that  the  framers  of  the  constitution  in- 
tended by  this  provision  to  prevent  the 
citizens  of  Indiana  from  calling  a  constitu- 
tional convention  any  time  they  chose. 
It  is  more  probable  that  it  was  intended 
by  this  referendum  to  insure  each  gener- 
ation two  chances  of  holding  a  convention 
in  spite  of  an  opposing  General  Assembly. 
It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the  immedi- 
ate followers  of  Jefferson  looked  with 
favor  upon  the  constitutional  convention 
as  one  of  the  most  effective  institutions  of 
popular  Democracy. 

"There  appears  to  have  been  very  little 
demand  for  a  new  convention  for  a  long 
time  after  1816.  As  one  of  the  opponents 
of  calling  a  convention,  George  W.  Julian 
said  in  1847 :  The  people  of  Indiana  are 
attached  to  their  constitution.  It  is  the 
work  of  their  forefathers.  Under  it  for 
thirty  years  they  have  enjoyed  a  degree  of 
prosperity  unsurpassed  by  any  State  in 
the  Union.' 

"The  cause  for  calling  a  constitutional 
convention  among  English-speaking  peo- 
ple is  always  found  to  be  insistent  and 
acting  through  considerable  periods  of 
time.  The  American  people  generally 
have  not  lightly  called  into  activity  such 
revolutionary  bodies.  There  has  always 
been  some  deep-seated  dissatisfaction. 
There  were  several  minor  defects  in  the 
working  of  the  State  and  local  govern- 
ments under  the  first  constitution,  but  the 
chief  ground  of  complaint  was  the  work- 
ing of  the  General  Assembly.  This  body 
had  led  the  State  into  a  gigantic  system  of 
internal  improvements  in  which  the  State 
had    lost    more    than    $12,000,000.      The 

State  became  deeply  involved  in  debt.  Its 
bonds  were  hawked  about  the  Eastern 
markets  as  low  as  17  cents  on  the  dollar. 
A  gang  of  hungry  office  holders  had  been, 
and  still  were,  robbing  the  State,  and  the 
General  Assembly  seemed  unable  or  un- 
willing to  shake  them  off.  The  annual 
meetings  of  the  Assembly  seemed  to  be  an 
unnecessai'y  expense  and  the  annual  elec- 
tions kept  the  people  in  a  political  turmoil. 
Moreover,  the  General  Assembly  was 
neglecting  the  affairs  of  the  State  and  giv- 
ing its  time  and  attention  to  hundreds  of 
petty  private  affairs.  A  reading  of  the 
titles  of  the  special  laws  of  any  session 
will  give  one  an  idea  of  the  petty  jobbery 
that  was  carried  on  by  means  of  special 

"With  all  this  dissatisfaction  the  de- 
mand for  a  convention,  if  we  are  to  take 
the  votes  on  the  subject  as  evidence,  was 
not  strong.  There  is  scarcely  any  mention 
of  the  vote  on  the  subject  up  till  1846.  A 
referendum  had  been  taken  in  1823,  only 
seven  years  after  the  constitution  went 
into  effect.  The  vote  was  decisive  against 
calling  a  convention.  In  1828,  four  years 
later,  the  regular  twelve-year  referendum 
was  taken  with  a  similar  result.  During 
the  following  twelve  years  there  was  lit- 
tle agitation  on  the  subject.  The  General 
Assembly  of  1845,  however,  took  up  the 
subject.  There  was  a  spirited  demand  by 
a  few  energetic  members  for  a  convention. 
They  succeeded  in  passing  a  law  authoriz- 
ing a  referendum  on  the  subject  at  the 
ensuing  August  election.  This  was  six 
years  earlier  than  the  constitution  de- 
manded, but  the  friends  of  the  movement 
urged  with  force  that  the  people  had  an 
undeniable  and  inalienable  right  to  call  a 
constitutional   convention   whenever  they 


"The  result  of  this  referendum  vote  was 
that  out  of  a  total  of  126,133  votes  cast 
at  the  State  election  there  were  33,173  for 
a  convention  and  28,843  opposed.  A  ma- 
jority of  all  the  voters  had  not  expressed 
themselves  on  the  subject. 

"When  this  vote  was  reported  to  the 
General  Assembly  it  provoked  a  serious 
debate.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the 
vote  was  not  decisive  and  that  it  did  not 
warrant  the  General  Assembly  in  calling 
the  proposed  convention.  Many  members 
favored  submitting  the  question  again  to 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1 

a  popular  vote  at  the  next  August  election. 
Other  members  opposed  all  agitation  on 
the  subject  as  calculated  to  bring  political 
disquiet  and  unrest.  The  times,  it  was 
pointed  out,  were  especially  dangerous. 
The  State  was  almost  bankrupt,  taxes 
were  high  and  times  were  hard.  Of  all 
times  the  present,  it  was  urged,  would  be 
the  worst  to  agitate  a  change  in  the  funda- 
mental law. 

"In  spite  of  the  efforts  of  a  determined 
group  of  members  the  question  was  not 
favored  by  the  General  Assembly.  It  is 
noticeable  that  what  might  be  called  the 
professional  politicians  avoided  taking 
sides  in  this  discussion.  The  referendum 
in  1846  was  not  mentioned  in  the  leading 
papers,  and  evidently  was  not  discussed 
on  the  stump.  The  Governor,  in  report- 
ing the  result  of  the  vote  in  his  annual 
message,  made  no  recommendation  that 
might  be  construed  into  a  position. 

"The  demand  for  a  convention,  how- 
ever, did  not  cease.  The  Democratic  party 
in  general  favored  the  proposition.  The 
court  practice,  they  said,  was  especially 
costly.  Probate  courts  and  associate 
judges  were  regarded  as  worse  than  use- 
less; they  were  meddlesome.  The  justices 
had  once  been  the  chief  officers  of  the 
county,  but  since  a  board  of  commission- 
ers had  taken  their  duties,  they  had  be- 
come petty  politicians,  valuable  only  to 
those  who  wished  to  bribe  a  court  or  cor- 
rupt a  jury. 


"Many  good  citizens,  regardless  of 
party,  looked  upon  the  appointing  power 
of  the  Governor  as  a  source  of  much  evil. 
They  thought  that  such  officers  as  the  Au- 
ditor, Treasurer  and  other  State  officers 
should  be  elected  by  the  people  rather  than 
by  the  General  Assembly.  The  recent  at- 
tempt by  the  Governor  to  barter  nomina- 
tions to  the  Supreme  Court  for  a  seat  in 
the  United  States  Senate  had  given  a  con- 
crete point  to  the  general  demand  to  limit 
the  appointing  power  of  the  Governors. 
By  1849  Governor  Whitcomb,  sure  of  his 
promotion  to  the  United  States  Senate, 
came  out  openly  for  a  convention  in  his 
annual  message.  He,  no  doubt,  put  his 
finger  on  the  weakest  point  in  the  govern- 
ment under  the  old  constitution  when  he 
emphasized  the  evil  of  private  and  local 
legislation.  In  the  annual  volumes  of  laws 
for  the  previous  four  or  five  sessions  the 

local  laws  had  outnumbered  the  general 
five  or  six  to  one.  In  the  volume  of  1849 
there  are  343  acts  published  as  'local  laws' 
and  273  as  'general  laws.'  Of  the  latter 
more  than  200  are  strictly  'local.'  The 
time  of  the  whole  session  was  consumed 
in  political  jockeying  and  log-rolling.  The 
annual  volume  of  laws  noted  above  con- 
tained 616  laws  and  37  joint  resolutions. 


"The  General  Assembly  of  1848  took  up 
the  question  and  passed  an  act  submitting 
the  question  of  calling  a  constitutional 
convention  to  the  voters.  A  large  major- 
ity of  the  votes  cast  at  the  ensuing  August 
election  were  in  favor  of  calling  a  conven- 
tion. The  following  General  Assembly,  by 
act  approved  January  18,  1850,  ordered 
an  election  of  delegates.  The  election  was 
held  at  the  same  time  and  in  all  essential 
parts  was  the  same  as  an  election  of  mem- 
bers of  the  General  Assembly.  There 
were  150  delegates  chosen  from  the  same 
districts  as  the  members  of  the  House  and 
Senate  except  in  two  unimportant  dis- 

"There  was  little  interest  in  the  cam- 
paign as  far  as  electing  delegates  was  con- 
cerned. It  was  hoped  by  many  to  make 
the  elections  nonpartisan,  but  such  was 
not  the  case  as  a  rule.  It  seems  true,  how- 
ever, that  the  Whigs  took  considerably  less 
political  interest  in  the  election  than  the 


"A  caucus  of  the  Whig  members  of  the 
General  Assembly  declared  in  favor  of  a 
constitutional  convention  and  especially 
urged  that  the  following  changes  be  made 
in  the  constitution :  All  officers  should  be 
elected  by  popular  vote;  the  General  As- 
sembly should  be  prohibited  from  borrow- 
ing money  except  for  urgent  necessities; 
the  county  seminary  funds  should  be 
transferred  to  the  fund  for  common 
schools;  the  General  Assembly  should 
meet  biennially;  local  legislation  should 
be  prohibited;  the  number  of  officers 
should  be  reduced  and  the  establishment 
of  new  ones  forbidden;  a  homestead  ex- 
emption should  be  provided,  and  more  en- 
couragement should  be  given  to  agricul- 
ture, mining  and  manufacturing. 

"In  the  county  of  Marion  the  Whigs 
offered  to  divide  the  ticket  equally  and 



make  no  contest,  but  the  Democrats  re- 
fused. In  Jefferson  county  the  Whigs 
compromised  on  a  ticket  of  two  Whigs  and 
one  Democrat.  There  were  many  in- 
stances in  which  fusion  tickets  were 
elected  without  contest,  but  fusion  was  not 
general.  Of  the  fifty  delegates  from  sena- 
torial districts  thirty-three  were  Demo- 
crats and  seventeen  were  Whigs;  of  the 
one  hundred  delegates  from  representa- 
tive districts  sixty-four  were  Democrats 
and  thirty-six  Whigs.  Of  the  fifty  State 
Senators  elected  at  the  time  thirty-three 
were  Democrats  and  seventeen  Whigs;  of 
the  Representatives  sixty-two  were  Demo- 
crats and  thirty-eight  Whigs.  It  will  thus 
be  seen  that  the  political  affiliations  of  the 
General  Assembly  and  the  constitutional 
convention  were  the  same. 


"The  delegates,  150  in  number,  assem- 
bled in  the  Capitol  building  October  7, 
1850,  and  were  organized  bv  the  Secretary 
of  State,  Charles  H.  Test.  They  were  a 
representative  body  of  citizens.  The  best- 
known  men  of  the  State  at  the  time,  how- 
ever, were  not  present.  From  our  dis- 
tance one  would  say  that  Robert  Dale 
Owen,  Alvin  P.  Hovey,  Thomas  A.  Hen- 
dricks, W.  S.  Holman,  Schuyler  Colfax 
and  Horace  P.  Biddle  were  among  its  most 
distinguished  members,  but  they  were 
young  and  entirely  without  reputation  at 
the  time.  The  really  distinguished  men  of 
the  convention,  as  they  gathered  together 
for  the  first  time,  were  Thomas  D.  Wal- 
pole,  Abel  Pepper,  Daniel  Kelso,  James  G. 
Reed,  David  Kilgore,  Ross  Smiley,  Michael 
G.  Bright,  William  M.  Dunn,  George  W. 
Carr,  David  Wallace,  Jacob  Page  Chap- 
man, James  Rariden  and  John  I.  Mor- 
rison. Seventy-five  of  the  members  had 
served  in  the  General  Assembly,  thirteen 
of  whom  had  sat  in  the  last  session. 
Twenty-five  more  made  this  the  stepping 
stone  to  later  legislative  service.  Four- 
teen saw  service  in  the  United  States  Con- 
gress, two  later  became  Governors,  while 
one  was  an  ex-Governor.  There  were 
seven  well-known  editors,  three  of  whom 
came  from  Indianapolis.  The  great  law- 
yers of  the  State  were  noticeably  absent. 
A  widespread  prejudice  against  educated 
men  existed  at  the  time.  There  were  three 
graduates  of  the  State  University  and  per- 
haps as  many  more  were  graduates  of 
other  colleges. 


"The  spirit  of  Jack.son  controlled  the 
convention.  Daniel  Read,  a  delegate  of 
Monroe  and  a  professor  of  the  State  Uni- 
versity, referred  to  Jackson  as  'a  man  of 
as  remarkable  sagacity  as  ever  lived.'  As 
a  consequence  of  this  it  was  attempted  to 
strengthen  Democracy  among  the  people 
by  bringing  the  Government  nearer  the 
voter.  The  Secretary,  Treasurer  and  Au- 
ditor of  State,  formerly  appointed  by  the 
General  Assembly,  were  made  elective.  To 
these  were  added  the  new  office  of  Su- 
perintendent of  Public  Instruction  to  be 
filled  by  popular  election.  Besides  the 
above  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme  and  Cir- 
cuit Courts  were  made  elective  by  the  peo- 
ple for  six-year  terms.  The  Prosecuting 
Attorneys  and  the  local  justices,  all  for- 
merly appointed,  were  made  elective,  the 
former  by  the  voters  in  the  judicial  cir- 
cuit and  the  latter  by  the  voters  of  the 
township.  In  the  county  the  voters  were 
made  the  electors  of  a  Clerk  of  the  Circuit 
Court,  an  Auditor,  Recorder,  Treasurer, 
Sheriff,  Coroner  and  Surveyor  for  each 
county.  The  General  Assembly  was  given 
permission  to  establish  other  elective  offi- 
cers, a  power  which  it  has  used  immoder- 
ately. Some  of  these  officers  so  elected 
were  eligible  only  for  one  term,  but  the 
majority  were  permitted  to  hold  for  two 
consecutive  terms.  In  dealing  with  the 
suffrage  elections  and  oflfice  holding,  the 
general  principles  of  Jacksonian  De- 
mocracy then  prevalent  were  applied.  In 
general  the  convention  made  the  most  lib- 
eral application  of  the  principles  of  man- 
hood suffrage  and  popular  elections. 

"It  was  accused  in  many  places  of  play- 
ing politics  by  allowing  unnaturalized 
citizens  to  vote  after  one  year's  residence. 
Senator  Bright  made  this  criticism. 

"In  dealing  with  the  negroes,  both  free 
and  slave,  the  convention  illustrated  the 
confused  political  notions  of  the  times.  It 
re-enacted  the  provisions  of  the  ordinance 
of  1787  with  a  bruskness  that  indicated  an 
absolute  majority  of  Abolitionists;  yet  the 
provisions  refusing  negroes  the  right  to 
vote  or  even  to  settle  in  the  State  are,  in 
spirit,  directly  contradictory  to  the  above 
enactment.  Not  only  provisions,  but 
the  speeches  of  the  members  on  the  ques- 
tion of  slavery,  show  the  utmost  diversity 
of    opinion.      Not    less    than    forty    .set 



speeches  on  slavery,  few  of  them  dealing 
with  any  question  before  the  convention, 
were  made  by,  the  members. 

"In  the  article  on  the  legislative  depart- 
ment two  important  changes  were  made, 
both  dictated  by  the  overwhelming  proof 
of  experience.  One  change  was  the  sub- 
stitution of  biennial  for  annual  sessions  of 
the  General  Assembly.  The  other  forbade 
the  General  Assembly  making  special  or 
local  laws. 

"In  this  field  the  granting  of  divorces  by 
the  General  Assembly  had  occasioned  most 
hostile  criticism.  For  years  the  churches 
had  opposed  this  exercise  of  power  by  a 
legislative  body.  A  former  General  As- 
sembly had  invested  the  State  courts  with 
power  to  try  divorce  bills,  but  the  Assem- 
bly could  not  divest  itself  of  the  power 
and  the  abuse  continued. 


"The  convention  adjourned  Monday 
morning,  February  10,  1851.  It  had  been 
in  session  eighteen  weeks.  No  event  in 
the  State's  history  had  received  as  much 
attention  and  publicity.  The  daily  papers 
and  many  of  the  larger  weeklies  published 
the  proceedings  entire  from  week  to  week 
or  from  day  to  day.  Innumerable  articles 
by  citizens  in  praise  or  condemnation  of 
the  work  appeared  in  the  papers.  An- 
swers by  the  members  in  defense  were 
equally  plentiful.  Editorials  explained 
the  work  of  the  convention  day  by  day  and 
gave  the  editors'  opinions  of  its  value.  It 
was  an  eighteen  weeks'  course  in  political 
science  for  the  citizens  of  the  State. 

"The  completed  constitution  was  read 
at  the  last  session  of  the  convention  on  the 
morning  of  February  10.  It  appeared  at 
once  on  the  front  pages  of  the  newspapers, 
many  of  which  repeated  its  publication  in 
the  three  or  four  succeeding  issues.  The 
convention  ordered  55,000  copies  of  the 
constitution— 50,000  in  English  and  5,000 
in  German — printed  for  distribution. 
These  appeared  early  in  March. 

"The  convention  had  suggested  that  the 
new  constitution  be  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple for  ratification  or  rejection  at  the  next 
August  election.  The  General  Assembly 
affirmed  this  suggestion  February  4,  1851, 
and  the  Governor's  proclamation  followed 
immediately,  directing  the  election  officers 
to  carry  the  order  into  efl'ect. 


"There  was  no  organized  opposition  to 
the  ratification.  Both  parties  favored  the 
new  constitution.  At  the  ensuing  election 
every  county  gave  an  affirmative  majority 
but  Ohio.  Starke  county  cast  a  unanimous 
vote  for  the  constitution.  The  total  vote 
was  113,230  for  and  27,638  against  ratifi- 
cation, a  majority  of  85,592  out  of  a  total 
vote  of  140,868.  The  vote  for. the  exclu- 
sion of  colored  persons  was  substantially 
the  same,  being  an  affirmative  vote  of  113,- 
828  out  of  a  total  vote  of  135,701.  Three 
counties,  Lagrange,  Randolph  and  Steu- 
ben, voted  against  negro  exclusion.  The 
total  vote  on  the  constitution  was  little 
short  of  that  cast  for  Congressmen.  The 
total  vote  in  the  ten  Congressional  dis- 
tricts was  148,529.  That  there  was  no 
partisan  opposition  to  the  constitution  is 
shown  by  this  vote.  The  Democrats  car- 
ried the  State  at  this  election  by  a  major- 
ity of  only  9,469. 

"The  new  constitution  went  into  opera- 
tion November  1,  1851.  The  General  As- 
sembly elected  in  August,  1851,  met  as  di- 
rected by  the  old  constitution.  The  first 
general  election  under  the  new  constitu- 
tion was  held  in  October,  1852,  the  old  offi- 
cers holding  until  the  newly  elected  ones 
were  qualified  and  took  their  positions  ac- 
cording to  law.  There  was  no  jar  in  the 
operations  of  the  State  government  dur- 
ing the  change. 

"One  of  the  objections  urged  at  first 
against  a  constitutional  convention  was 
that  it  would  cost  an  enormous  sum  of 
money  at  a  time  when  the  State  was  al- 
most bankrupt  and  could  ill  afford  to  spend 
any  money  except  for  the  most  urgent 
need.  The  total  expense  for  the  eighteen- 
week  session,  as  shown  by  the  State  Treas- 
urer's report  was  $85,043.82." 

If  it  be  true,  as  contended  by  John 
Quincy  Adams,  that  "the  will  of  the  people 
is  the  end  of  all  legitimate  government  on 
earth,"  then  there  can  be  no  diversity  of 
opinion  as  to  the  necessity  of  the  "will  of 
the  people"  being  soundly  formed  and 
thoughtfully  executed.  When  this  is  ex- 
pected to  be  done,  the  character,  stability 
and  judgment  of  the  electorate  must  have 
greater  consideration  than  has  been  be- 
stowed upon  the  same  for  decade  upon  de- 
cade.   Lincoln,  who  always  spoke  tenderly 



and  affectionately  of  the  "plain  people," 
and  who  for  many  years  sustained  very 
close  relations  to  the  masses,  felt  con- 
strained to  admit  that  "the  people  wob- 
ble," but  qualified  the  gentle  accusation  by 
saying  that  "they  finally  wobble  right." 
When  this  ensues,  as  Colonel  Geo.  B.  Lock- 
wood  interprets,  the  demagogue  disap- 
pears, the  fame  of  the  opportunist  withers, 
the  reputation  of  the  political  coward  dies. 
But  what  about  the  mischief  wrought 
while  the  people  wobbled? 

Burke  was  eternally  right  when  he  de- 
clared that  "government  is  a  contrivance 
of  human  wisdom  to  provide  for  human 
wants."  Again  is  thus  pressed  upon  pub- 
lic attention  the  desirability  and  necessity 
of  an  alert  electorate,  the  safeguard  of  a 
Republic.  But,  bear  in  mind,  alertness 
can  neither  be  created  by  legislative  en- 
actment nor  instilled  into  the  electorate  by 
constitutional  provision.  It  will  have  to 
be  evolved  from  a  citizenship  of  tested 
virtue,  of  nobility  of  purpose,  of  patriotic 
aims,  and  of  good  common  sense.  An 
alert  electorate  will  be  guided  by  sound 
leadership  instead  of  being  swayed  by  the 
sophistry  of  glib-tongued  demagogues. 
Reason  must  count  for  more  than  seduc- 
tive plausibility ;  stern  truth  for  more  than 
evanescent  sentimentalism. 

As  some  viands  are  unpalatable  to  epi- 
cures, so  stern  truth  is  distasteful  to  per- 
sons who  care  to  burden  their  minds  only 
with  things  that  accord  with  their  fancy. 
Unmindful  of  such  aversion.  Professor 
William  James  is  entitled  to  being  ac- 
corded a  respectful  hearing  while  shouting 
these  solemn  truths  into  the  public  ear: 

"The  human  individual  lives  usually  far 
within  his  limits.  He  possesses  powers  of 
various  sorts  which  he  habitually  fails  to 
use.  He  energizes  below  his  maximum 
and  he  behaves  below  his  optimum.  .  .  . 
Compared  with  what  we  ought  to  be,  we 
are  only  half  awake.  Our  fires  are 
damped,  our  drafts  are  checked.  We  are 
making  use  of  only  a  small  part  of  our 
possible  mental  and  physical  resources." 

The  right  to  vote  is  a  privilege,  not  a 
natural  prerogative;  a  delegated  author- 
ity. It  is  conferred  upon  individuals  by 
constitutional  ordinance.  The  privilege 
thus  accorded  ought  to  be  .sacredly  re- 
garded. It  probably  would  be  were  it  not 
§0  common.  But,  however  regarded,  it  is 
the  essence  of  governmental  authority. 
Its  debasement,  debauch  or  decadence 
would  presage  the  inevitable  downfall  of 
free  institutions. 

Now  let  us  look  at  some  of  the  incon- 
sistencies traceable  to  the  indiff"erence  of 
the  electorate.  By  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority of  the  popular  vote  the  draft  of  a 
constitution  was  ratified  in  Indiana,  in  the 
year  1851,  which  contained  a  clause  that 
conferred  upon  aliens  residing  within  the 
State  one  year  the  right  to  vote  upon  hav- 
ing made  a  declaration  of  intention  to  be- 
come a  citizen,  in  conformity  with  the 
naturalization  laws  of  the  United  States. 
About  that  time  the  Know-Nothing  move- 
ment was  making  considerable  headway, 
so  that  within  a  few  years  it  became  a  con- 
trolling factor  in  Indiana  politics.  Then 
formal  declaration  was  made  by  the  then 
dominant  party  organization  "that  we  are 
in  favor  of  the  naturalization  laws  of  Con- 
gress with  the  five-year  probation,  and 
that  the  right  of  suffrage  should  accom- 
pany and  not  precede  naturalization." 
Now,  why  did  these  people  fail  to  assert 
themselves  when  a  new  constitution  was 
being  framed  and  adopted?  There  was  no 
pressure  brought  upon  the  constitutional 
convention  by  persons  of  foreign  birth  to 
make  voters  of  aliens  upon  a  one-year's 
residence  in  the  State.  It  is  entirely 
within  the  bounds  of  reason  and  probabil- 
ity to  say  that  not  a  half-dozen  aliens  set- 
tled down  in  Indiana  because  of  this  ex- 
traordinary grant  of  the  elective  fran- 
chise. Reasoning  persons  of  foreign  birth 
never  complained  of  the  five-year  proba- 
tionary period  established  under  our  nat- 
uralization laws.  On  the  contrary,  they 
commended  and  lauded    it    when    a    pro- 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

scriptive  cabal  temporarily  gained  ascend- 
ancy in  some  commonwealths  by  demand- 
ing that  the  probationary  period  be  ex- 
tended to  twenty-one  years  and  that 
Catholics  be  rendered  ineligible  to  public 
office.  Wisconsin,  with  its  immense  Ger- 
man, Norwegian  and  Scandinavian  popu- 
lation, a  few  years  since  abolished  the  one- 
year  abomination  and  limited  the  right  to 
vote  to  citizens  of  the  United  States  duly 
naturalized  or  to  the  manner  born.  Mich- 
igan did  practically  the  same  thing  when 
it  passed  under  a  new  constitution.  In 
Indiana  alone,  among  all  the  States  of  the 
central  West,  the  mistake  of  sixty  years 
ago  continues  as  a  mockery  to  the  high 
prerogative  of  citizenship. 

Perhaps  an  even  more  flagrant  incon- 
sistency was  enacted  in  our  neighboring 
State  of  Ohio.  During  the  sixties,  several 
years  after  the  Civil  War,  an  amendment 
to  the  constitution  to  strike  out  the  word 
"white"  was  submitted  to  popular  vote 
and  defeated  by  over  50,000.  On  the  very 
heels  of  this  popular  rejection  of  negro 
suffrage  the  vote  of  Ohio  was  recorded  in 
favor  of  the  fifteenth  amendment,  estab- 
lishing negro  suffrage  in  every  State  in  the 
Union — including  the  entire  mass  of 
ignorant  ex-slaves  in  the  cotton  States  of 
the  South.  A  more  flagrant  assault  upon 
intelligent  voting  never  was  perpetrated 
in  this  or  any  other  country.  To  cap  the 
climax,  just  as  soon  as  the  fraudulent 
ratification  of  the  fifteenth  amendment 
was  officially  proclaimed,  the  very  party 
that  had  brought  about  the  prostitution  of 
the  ballot  passed  an  act  by  Congress  ab- 
solutely abolishing  the  right  of  suffrage 
in  the  District  of  Columbia  by  making  all 
municipal  offices  appointive  by  a  commis- 
sion designated  by  the  President.  This 
action  was  prompted  by  the  fact  that  Ayith 
the  aid  of  disreputable  whites  in  the  city 
of  Washington  negro  domination  could 
and  doubtless  would  have  been  established 
at  the  capital  of  the  Nation.  Such  an  in- 
novation would,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Jacobins 

then  in  control  of  the  legislative  branch  of 
the  Government,  have  been  entirely  in 
order  in  Louisiana,  South  Carolina, 
Florida  and  Mississippi,  but  was  adjudged 
intolerable  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 

No  ism  has  ever  failed  to  find  champions 
and  supporters,  no  matter  how  absurd  it 
may  have  been,  measured  by  any  standard 
of  reasoning  or  common  sense. 

Recall  the  commotion  caused  by  the  Rev. 
William  Miller  of  Vermont  during  the 
early  forties,  when  he  issued  his  statement 
that  he  had  received  a  divine  command  to 
announce  the  second  coming  of  Christ 
about  the  year  1843 — how  many  people  de- 
voted all  their  time  to  preparing  them- 
selves for  the  ascension  to  heaven  in  white 
robes,  sacrificing  their  property,  and  do- 
ing all  manner  of  foolish  things.  Cogitate 
over  the  folly  of  owners  of  orchards  chop- 
ping down  their  apple  trees  during  the 
Washingtonian  crusade  against  liquor  so 
as  to  guard  against  the  product  of  the 
orchard  being  converted  into  cider.  Be- 
hold the  thousands  of  beguiled  men  and 
women  following  "Divine  Healer"  Schlat- 
ter from  day  to  day  and  professing  to  have 
been  freed  of  all  manner  of  diseases  and 
ailments  by  simply  touching  the  raiment 
of  that  shrewd  impostor.  Contemplate 
for  a  moment  the  large  number  of  dupes 
who  poured  their  shekels  into  the  capa- 
cious receptacles  of  the  Illinois  charlatan, 
John  G.  Schweinfurth,  who  by  artful 
methods  made  himself  appear  as  an  image 
of  Christ.  Peruse  the  statistics  emanat- 
ing from  several  of  the  governmental  de- 
partments at  Washington  setting  forth 
how  vigilant  officials  in  the  service  of 
Uncle  Sam  had  in  a  single  year  saved  gul- 
lible men  and  women  more  than  one  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  million  dollars.  Imag- 
ine for  a  moment  the  insecurity  of  life  and 
property  if  for  a  single  day  or  week  the 
protecting  arm  of  the  law's  vigilant  and 
faithful  sentinels  were  off  duty.  All  this 
furnishes  ample  reason  why  there  is  so 
much  "wobbling"  wherever  and  whenever 

(  138) 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY— 1816-1910 

glib-tongued  charlatans  and  unscrupulous 
demagogues  manage  to  get  the  ear  of  the 
dear  people.  And  thereby  is  furnished 
cogent  reason  why  safe,  sound,  trust- 
worthy leadership  is  so  much  needed  in 
every  locality,  in  every  village  and  ham- 
let, in  every  town  and  city,  in  every  county 
and  district — a  leadership  that  instills 
wholesome  sentiment  into  the  public  mind 
and  furnishes  incentive  to  right-thinking 
and  right-doing ;  a  leadership,  not  for  self- 
aggrandizement  and  spoliation,  but  a  lead- 
ership whose  chief  purpose  and  highest 
aim  is  to  promote  the  general  welfare  and 
to  foster  the  common  good.  Such  leader- 
ship does  not  go  upon  the  assumption  that 
politics  is  the  science  of  getting  51  per 
cent,  of  the  votes  by  hook  or  crook.  It  has 
a  higher  conception  of  politics.  It  believes 
in  honesty  being  the  best  policy  and  in 
right  making  might. 

In  the  maddening  race  for  building  up 
large  centers  of  population — big  cities — 
too  many  people  forget  all  about  the  notes 
of  warning  sounded  by  Jefferson.  That 
wise  patriot  and  far-seeing  statesman 
more  than  a  hundred  years  ago  described 
large  cities  as  being  "pestilential  to  the 
morals,  the  health  and  the  liberties  of 
men."  Several  of  the  New  England  States, 
recognizing  the  soundness  of  the  Jeffer- 
sonian  view,  safeguarded  themselves 
against  the  pernicious  effects  of  such 
massing  together  by  rendering  it  impossi- 
ble for  large  cities  to  gain  the  mastery  in 
legislative  assemblies  and  thus  control  the 
domestic  policies  of  these  commonwealths. 
The  Empire  State  of  the  Union  inserted  a 
clause  in  its  constitution  making  it  im- 
possible for  the  city  of  New  York  to  gain 
the  ascendancy  in  the  General  Assembly, 
no  matter  how  greatly  its  number  of  in- 
habitants might  exceed  that  of  the  rest  of 
the  State.  A  Senator,  discussing  this 
feature  of  legislative  apportionment,  made 
bold  to  declare  that  in  his  opinion  a  typical 
country  gentleman  in  the  interior  of  New 
York  ought  by  right  to  count  for  as  much 

as  at  least  a  half-dozen  dwellers  in  the 
slums  of  the  Bowery.  And  no  one  in  that 
body  took  issue  with  this  Senator  on  that 
proposition.  The  people  of  Indiana  will 
be  amenable  to  the  charge  of  gross  indif- 
ference to  the  State's  highest  intere.sts  if 
they  do  not  in  good  time  safeguard  them- 
selves in  .some  way  against  being  dom- 
inated by  large  centers  of  population.  The 
history  of  the  world  amply  verifies  the 
declaration  of  Dr.  Francis  E.  Clark  that 
"no  Nation  was  ever  overthrown  by  its 
farmers."  Let  the  so-called  rural  popula- 
tion and  the  inhabitants  of  the  thrifty 
towns  and  smaller  cities  bear  in  mind  that 
if  popular  delusion  should  ever  succeed 
in  foisting  upon  this  Commonwealth  a 
State-wide  primary  election  law  it  would 
be  easily  within  the  power  of  the  five  larg- 
er cities  to  control,  through  combination, 
the  nomination  of  every  candidate  on  the 
State  ticket.  The  powerful  influence  of 
money  in  politics  is  so  demoralizing  and 
pernicious  that  its  destructive  effects  are 
quickly  felt  wherever  exerted  to  any  con- 
siderable extent.  With  clear  vision  the 
sturdy  New  England  patriot,  Samuel 
Adams,  espied  what  was  coming  when  in 
1789  he  gave  expression  to  this  pregnant 
thought :  "We  have  achieved  a  great  lib- 
erty ;  we  have  wrought  out  a  great  consti- 
tution ;  but  my  only  fear  is  that  our  people, 
who  are  now  poor  and  simple  and  love  lib- 
erty because  they  have  made  sacrifices  for 
it,  will  after  a  while  grow  rich  and  will 
prefer  their  riches  to  their  liberty." 

Fittingly  there  may  be  added  to  this 
verified  apprehension  the  recent  lamenta- 
tion of  the  venerable  Dr.  Abraham 
Kuyper,  ex-premier  of  the  Netherlands 
and  advisor  to  Queen  Wilhelmina:  "The 
world  has  mocked  God !  The  nations  have 
forgotten  and  ignored  Him.  Even  in 
Christian  circles  there  were  departures 
from  Him  that  ruleth  over  earth  and  .skies. 
And  now  this  God,  mocked,  forgotten  and 
ignored,  fills  the  hearts  of  men  with  terror. 
The  mightiest  among  them  tremble." 

[Chapter  XVIIL] 



ONVENTION— literally,  a  com- 
ing together — derives  its  pol- 
itico-social meaning  from  the 
old  Roman  "Conveetu  populi" 
— the  gathering  of  the  people. 
It  is  applied  to  extraordinary, 
or,  at  least,  occasional  gather- 
ings, rather  than  to  the  regular  and  more 
frequent  meetings.  Thus,  a  fraternal  so- 
ciety has  its  local  lodges  and  meetings,  but 
the  larger  conventions  occur  only  once  in 
one  or  more  years ;  and  a  State  has  annual 
or  biennial  sessions  of  its  Legislature,  but 
its  constitutional  conventions  are  far 

In  nations  wherein  the  ultimate  sov- 
ereignty is  vested  in  the  people,  the  con- 
vention is  the  method  by  which  this  sov- 
ereignty is  peacefully  exerted;  the  people 
either  directly  or  through  delegates  tak- 
ing matters  into  their  own  hands  and  at 
their  pleasure  modifying  or  entirely 
changing  the  form  of  government.  Polit- 
ical economists  recognize  two  classes  of 
these  conventions — the  I'evolutionary, 
which  alters  the  form,  and  the  recon- 
structive, which  only  amends  it.  Of  the 
former  class  are  the  "Constituent  Assem- 
blies" of  France.  The  first  which  grew 
out  of  the  assembling  of  the  State's  gen- 
erals overthrew  the  monarchy  and  pro- 
claimed a  Republic;  and  there  have  been 
ten  others  since,  making  of  France  in  al- 
terations an  empire,  kingdom  and  repub- 
lic back  and  forth.  England  has  had  three 
conventions.  The  first  was  at  Runnymede, 
when  the  assembled  barons  reconstructed 
the  government  so  as  to  limit  the  power  of 
the  king ;  the  second  was  the  revolutionary 
convention  in  1660  which  set  aside  the 
Commonwealth  and  recalled  Charles  the 
Second  to  the  throne ;  the  third  was  the  re- 

constructive convention  of  1689,  which, 
assuming  the  kingdom  in  existence  though 
the  king  was  in  exile,  called  William  of 
Orange  to  reign  conjointly  with  Mary  his 
wife,  but  placed  additional  restraints  upon 
the  royal  prerogatives. 

In  this  country  there  have  been  many 
conventions  of  both  kinds.  At  the  very 
time  the  English  convention  was  calling 
William  and  Mary  to  the  throne,  the 
Massachusetts  colony  was  holding  a  revo- 
lutionary convention  which  deposed  Gov- 
ernor Andros,  overthrew  the  government 
he  had  set  up  and  restored  the  Charter 
rights.  Immediately  preceding  the  war 
for  Independence,  several  of  the  colonies, 
separately,  or  working  together,  held  con- 
ventions of  the  revolutionary  character, 
all  tending  to  a  change  of  government. 
The  Continental  Congress  that  issued  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  was  a  perfect 
example  of  the  revolutionary  convention. 

The  convention  which  framed  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  was  reconstructive.  It 
did  not  attempt  to  change  the  essential 
principles  of  the  Government,  but  only  "to 
form  a  more  perfect  Union."  In  the  order- 
ly development  of  our  Nation,  the  conven- 
tions which  formed  the  first  constitutions 
of  the  several  States  may  be  termed  revo- 
lutionary, inasmuch  as  they  change  the 
government  from  territorial  to  State, 
while  the  successive  conventions  that 
amend  the  constitutions  are  reconstruct- 
ive, because,  although  they  change  details, 
they  leave  the  general  structure  undis- 

At  present  the  most  common  use  of  the 
term  "convention"  is  in  connection  with 
political  parties — particularly  the  declara- 
tion of  their  principles  and  the  nomination 
of  their  candidates.    It  has  been  seen  that 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

in  the  earliest  years  of  the  Republic  no 
conventions  were  held  or  needed,  so  far 
as  national  affairs  were  concerned.  The 
views  of  the  Federalists  and  Anti-Federal- 
ists were  known  by  the  position  they  took 
on  the  Constitution,  and  the  platform  of 
the  Republican  party  was  embodied  in 
Jefferson's  letter  to  Washington.  As  to 
candidates,  there  were  none  but  Washing- 
ton, until  he  retired,  and  then  Jefferson 
and  Adams  were  universally  recognized  as 
representatives  of  their  respective  parties. 
In  State  elections  there  was  a  very  com- 
mon assent  that  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature, having  been  chosen  by  the  people, 
might  very  properly  gather  in  caucus  or 
convention  to  name  the  candidates.  By 
analogy  the  same  practice  was  transferred 
to  Congress  in  the  matter  of  naming  candi- 
dates for  President.  These  legislative  and 
congressional  caucuses,  as  they  were 
called,  were  in  reality  reconstructive  con- 
ventions, in  which  the  legislators,  acting 
as  delegates  for  the  rank  and  file  of  their 
respective  political  parties,  named  the  can- 
didates for  their  support.  It  was  not  until 
the  caucus,  becoming  a  "close  corpora- 
tion," had  been  made  the  instrument  for 
the  accoijiplishment  of  selfish  purposes, 
that  the  people  overthrew  it  and  estab- 
lished the  later  system — conventions  con- 
stituted for  the  sole  purpose  of  formulat- 
ing party  principles  and  nominating  can- 

The  earliest  of  these  conventions  were 
decidedly  revolutionary.  Some  of  them 
took  the  form  of  mass  meetings  and  im- 
promptu gatherings,  and  they  all  resulted 
in  overturning  the  old  order  of  things  and 
in  the  organization  of  new  parties.  The 
first  made  Jackson  President  and  formed 
the  Democratic  party.  Then  in  1832  a 
convention  presented  the  anti-Mason  party 
to  the  country,  and  two  or  three  years 
later  the  Whig  party  was  similarly 
brought  into  being.  In  1855-6  the  second 
Republican  party  was  formed  by  a  series 
of  revolutionary  conventions,  very  similar 

in  character  to  those  which  brought  forth 
the  Democratic  party  nearly  a  third  of  a 
century  earlier.  All  the  "third  parties" 
have  had  their  beginnings  in  the  same 

After  the  political  party  is  organized, 
the  conventions  that  formulate  its  prin- 
ciples and  nominate  its  candidates  are  re- 
constructive. They  pass  resolutions  and 
put  forth  platforms  to  adapt  the  party 
policy  to  new  conditions  that  arise,  and 
they  seek  to  nominate  candidates  that  will 
meet  the  popular  approval. 

For  all  these  purposes  the  convention  is 
the  ideal  method.  Properly  constituted,  it 
represents  the  whole  body.  Its  "coming 
together"  is  not  simply  the  physical  meet- 
ing of  the  delegates;  it  is  a  commingling 
of  minds.  It  furnishes  an  opportunity  for 
comparison  of  views  and  discussion  of  men 
and  measures  which  ought  to  result  in  the 
wisest  possible  action.  When  the  political 
unit  for  which  the  convention  acts  is  small 
the  whole  body  of  electors  may  "come  to- 
gether." Such  were  the  New  England 
town  meetings  copied  into  several  States. 
There  the  people  got  together,  talked  over 
the  public  needs,  debated  questions  of 
policy,  discussed  the  fitness  of  candidates, 
and  finally  passed  upon  all  the  measures, 
and  elected  the  officials  for  the  ensuing 
terms — a  sort  of  constitutional  convention, 
legislative  body  and  electoral  college 
blended  in  one. 

But  with  greater  population  and  larger 
units  of  territory,  the  direct  action  of  the 
electors  became  impossible,  and  the  dele- 
gate body  a  necessity. 

While  the  nominating  convention  re- 
tained its  original  and  proper  character  of 
representing  its  constituents  and  seeking 
to  promote  their  best  interests,  it  was  a 
powerful  instrument  for  good  in  the  polit- 
ical party.  It  combined  the  wisdom  of  all 
into  unified  action. 

But  abuses  arose.  The  selfishness  of 
party  backers  seeking  personal  advantage 
rather  than  the  good  Of  either  party  or 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

country,  led  them  to  attempt  the  control 
of  conventions.  Too  often,  notably  so  in 
localities  where  a  nomination  is  equivalent 
to  an  election,  they  succeeded.  By  means 
of  "snap  caucuses"  and  corruption  of 
delegates  they  subverted  the  will  of  the 
people  and  "bossed"  the  convention,  mak- 
ing it  subservient  to  their  own  ends.  This 
state  of  affairs  has  existed  to  a  far  greater 
extent  in  the  Republican  than  in  the  Dem- 
ocratic party,  by  reason  of  the  fact  that 
the  former,  until  a  few  years  ago,  has  had 
much  more  to  do  .with  the  distribution  of 
the  loaves  and  fishes  than  the  latter.  Un- 
fortunately, a  deplorably  large  number  of 
voters  has  come  to  regard  the  distribution 
of  loaves  and  fishes  as  the  chief  function 
of  party  organization. 

Naturally  the  people  revolted  and  the 
convention  fell  into  disrepute.  Hence  a 
substitute  has  been  sought  in  the  primary 
elections.  But  this  is  a  cumbrous  method. 
It  leaves  out  entirely  the  consultations  and 
discussions  which  were  the  foundation  of 
the  convention's  strength.  Then,  too,  the 
primary  election  is  not  free  from  the  de- 
fect which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  boss  con- 
trol of  the  convention — the  indifference  of 
the  people  except  on  extraordinary  occa- 

If  the  people  would  turn  out  at  the 
caucuses  and  elect  proper  delegates  to  the 
convention,  control  by  corrupt  bosses  could 

not  occur,  and  experience  so  far  indicates 
that  the  voters  are  just  as  indifferent  in 
the  ordinary  primary  election.  The  "short 
ballot"  which  restricts  the  elective  offices 
to  a  few  may  be  a  remedy,  by  giving  the 
people  a  little  better  chance  to  know  what 
they  are  doing  instead  of  leaving  them  to 
vote  in  the  dark,  as  most  have  to  at  pres- 
ent. But  the  real  cure  of  all  the  evils  of 
representative  government  is  an  alert,  in- 
telligent electorate,  and  the  best  way  for 
it  to  act  is  through  the  properly  consti- 
tuted conventions. 

The  customs  and  instincts  of  the  Ameri- 
can people  tend  toward  the  placing  of 
representatives  between  themselves  and 
the  selection  of  their  candidates.  When- 
ever a  prirriary  election  law  runs  counter 
to  this  instinct  it  becomes  null  and  void  in 
some  way  or  other.  The  people  will  get 
around  it  by  conferences  or  "unofficial" 
conventions.  The  underlying  common 
sense  of  the  electorate  demands  the  con- 
sultation and  discussion  of  platforms  and 
candidates,  which  can  be  secured  only  in 
a  delegate  convention.  It  is  proper  that 
such  convention  be  safeguarded  as  far  as 
possible  against  corrupt  or  selfish  control, 
but  the  surest  safeguard  is  to  be*  found  in 
a  patriotic  electorate,  vigilant  and  intelli- 
gent in  selecting  the  delegates  that  consti- 
tute the  convention. 

(  143  ) 

[Chapter  XIX.] 



HE  Indiana  Democracy  met  in 
State  convention  at  Indiana- 
polis February  24,  1852. 
Colonel  A.  C.  Pepper  of  Ohio 
county  was  made  tempoi-ary 
chairman  and  C.  S.  Horton  of 
Switzerland  county  temporary 

A  committee  on  permanent  organization 
having  been  selected,  its  recommendation 
of  the  following-named  permanent  officers 
was  unanimously  approved  by  the  conven- 

President — Judge  Thomas  L.  Smith,  of 
Floyd  county. 

Vice-Presidents — Ethan  Allen  Brown, 
Ohio;  Gamaliel  Taylor,  Jefferson;  Wm. 
Rockhill,  Allen;  Z.  Tannehill,  Bartholo- 

Secretaries — James  Elder,  Wayne;  John 
B.  Norman,  Floyd;  Austin  H.  Brown, 
Marion.  (These  three  gentlemen  were 
editors  of  influential  Democratic  news- 

Robert  Dale  Owen  presented  this  reso- 
lution, which  was  unanimously  adopted 
amidst  vociferous  applause : 

"Resolved,  That  this  convention  nom- 
inate as  Democratic  candidate  for  Gov- 
ernor for  the  next  term,  Joseph  A. 

For  Lieutenant-Governor,  Ashbel  P. 
Willard  of  New  Albany  was  nominated  by 
practical  unanimity. 

The  remainder  of  the  State  ticket  was 
made  to  consist  of  these  selections : 

Secretary  of  State — Nehemiah  Hayden, 

Auditor  of  State— John  P.  Dunn,  Perry. 

State  Treasurer  —  Elijah  Newland, 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction — 
W.  C.  Larabee,  Putnam. 

Supreme  Judges — Wm.  Z.  Stuart,  Cass; 
Andrew  Davidson,  Decatur;  Samuel  E. 
Perkins,  Marion;  Addison  L.  Roach, 

Editorially,  the  Iiulianapolis  Sentinel 
spoke  in  these  commendatory  terms  of  the 
action  of  the  convention : 

"Our  present  popular  Governor  is  the 
Democratic  nominee.  He  has  resided  in 
the  State  thirty-five  years.  Unaided  by 
wealth,  influence  or  name,  he  has  risen 
from  the  humble  bricklayer — the  orphan 
boy — to  his  present  position.  At  twenty- 
two  he  entered  the  State  Legislature  as  a 
Representative  from  Parke  county.  He 
served  one  term  in  the  State  Senate,  and 
afterwards  as  a  member  of  Congress  from 
the  Vigo  district.  Elected  to  his  present 
position  over  his  popular  and  worthy  com- 
petitor by  a  majority  of  9,778,  he  is  again 
presented  for  the  suffrages  of  the  people 
of  Indiana.  His  name  is  a  tower  of 
strength.  The  hearts  of  the  people  are 
with  him  and  for  him.  The  young  Whig 
lawyers  with  sleek  heads  and  flowing 
beards  may  denounce  him  with  their 
vituperation  and  abuse  to  their  heart's  con- 
tent. The  honest  farmers  and  working 
men  are  with  him." 

The  compensation  of  State  officers  in 
those  days  was  certainly  moderate.  In  a 
speech  delivered  in  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, May  19,  Robert  Dale  Owen 
recommended  that  the  annual  salaries  be 
fixed  at  these  figures:  Governor,  $1,500; 
Supreme  Judges,  $1,200;  Circuit  Judges, 
$1,200;  State  officers,  $1,200;  Librarian, 
$700.  This  was  an  increase  of  $200  each 
in  the  salaries  of  eighteen  officers  and 
much  less  than  the  maximum  talked  of  at 
the  time,  which  was.  Governor,  $2,500,  etc. 




With  pardonable  pride,  the  Indianapolis 
Sentinel  pointed  to  the  splendid  record 
made  by  Governors  Whitcomb  and  Wright 
in  extricating  the  State  from  the  financial 
dilemma  into  which  it  had  fallen  under 
Whig  administration.  Here  is  a  sample  of 
the  Sentinel's  encomiums : 

"When  the  Democrats  were  called  to  ad- 
minister the  State  government,  her  credit 
was  prostrated ;  no  interest  was  paid  upon 
her  debt,  and  so  dark  and  gloomy  was  the 
future  that  the  fearful  thought  of  repudia- 
tion was  springing  up  in  various  parts  of 
the  State.  The  State  debt  was  then  almost 
$17,000,000  and  the  interest  was  increas- 
ing with  fearful  rapidity.  But  look  at  the 
change  which  eight  years  has  made.  The 
State  now  owes  less  than  $7,400,000;  her 
■  credit  is  sustained  in  every  market  and  the 
dark  thought  of  repudiation  has  given 
place  to  the  bright  hopes  of  freedom  from 
indebtedness.  $2,424,000  has  been  paid  m 
money,  and  in  redeeming  the  outstandmg 
scrip  from  circulation,  the  remainder  by 
the  transfer  of  the  Wabash  and  Erie 


On  the  night  of  the  convention  the  Hon. 
Ethan  Allen  Brown,  when  returning  to 
the  evening  session,  fell  over  an  obstruc- 
tion and  inj  ured  his  hand.  He  was  obliged 
to  leave  the  convention  and  return  to  his 
hotel.  His  hand  continuing  to  bleed,  a 
physician  was  summoned,  and  shortly 
after  his  arrival  Mr.  Brown  died.  Death 
was  caused  by  the  bursting  of  a  blood  ves- 
sel. Mr.  Brown  had  just  been  chosen  as 
delegate-at-large  to  the  National  Conven- 
tion at  Baltimore. 

For  the  State-at-Large :      John    Pettit, 
Tippecanoe;    James   H.   Lane,   Dearborn. 
Contingents :    Dr.  W.  F.  Sherrod,  Orange ; 
John  W.  Dodd,  Grant. 


1.  Benjamin  R.  Edmonston,  Dubois  county. 

2.  James  A.  Athon,  Clark. 

3.  John  A.  Hendricks,  Jefferson. 

EMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

4.  Ebenezer  Dumont,  Dearborn. 

5.  William  Grose,  Henry. 

6.  William  J.  Brown,  Marion. 

7.  Oliver  P.  Davis,  Vermillion. 

8.  Lorenzo  C.  Dougherty,  Boone. 

9.  Samuel  A.  Hall,  Cass. 

10.  Reuben  J.  Dawson,  DeKalb. 

11.  James  F.  McDowell,  Grant. 


Ethan  Allen  Brown Ohio 

John  W.  Davis Sullivan 

W.  J.  Brown Marion 

John   S.   Buckles Delaware 

W.  W.   McCoy Laporte 

Michael  G.  Bright Jefferson 

A.  G.  Porter,  C.  G.  Werbe, 

David  Reynolds,     N.  Bolton, 
L.  Dunlap,  Francis  King, 

Wm.  H.  Morrison,  J.  P.  Drake, 
Albert  Gall,  W.  J.  Brown. 


Governor  Wright  never  was  and  never 
could  be  a  champion  of  the  institution  of 
slavery.  But  he  was  at  the  same  time  a 
conservative  as  to  the  manner  of  dealing 
with  the  slave  question.  He  recognized  the 
fact  that  slavery  existed  when  the  Union 
was  formed;  that  its  existence  was  recog- 
nized by  law,  and  that  under  the  law  slave- 
holders had  rights  that  could  neither  be 
ignored  nor  violated  with  impunity.  His 
chief  concern  at  that  time  was  to  preserve 
the  peace  and  to  avert  sectional  strife.  In 
order  that  his  attitude  with  reference  to 
the  then  pending  issues  might  be  fully  un- 
derstood, he  declared  himself  thus  in  a 
statement  published  in  the  Sentinel  of  De- 
cember 5,  1851 : 

"Indiana  holds  him  an  enemy  to  the 
wellrbeing  of  this  Republic  who  pursues 
any  course  tending  to  widen  the  breach  be- 
tween the  North  and  the  South.  Minor 
questions  sink  into  insignificance  com- 
pared to  the  great  paramount  duty  of 
every  American  citizen,  the  preservation 
and  integrity  of  the  American  Union. 

"Each  and  all  of  the  laws  constituting 
that  compromise  which  has  been  as  oil 
cast  upon  the  troubled  waters  are  assented 

(  146) 


1  6  -  1  9  1   G 

to  and  have  been  carried  out  so  far  as  they 
apply  to  us,  in  word  and  letter,  according 
to  the  strictest  judicial  construction,  by 
citizens  of  our  State.  This  has  been  cor- 
dially and  with  as  near  an  approach  to 
hearty  unanimity  as  any  measure  enacted 
to  reconcile  similar  sectional  differences 
can  ever  be  expected  to  receive. 

"Indiana  desires  to  see  the  compromise 
made  under  the  Constitution  and  expressly 
framed  to  carry  into  effect  its  provisions, 
remain  undisturbed.  We  say  to  the  South, 
as  well  as  to  the  North,  that  these  meas- 
ures must  stand — that  this  sectional  con- 
troversy must  not  again  be  opened  up — 
that  time  is  an  element  which  enters  into 
everything  that  is  valuable,  must  test  their 
wisdom  of  efficacy — that  from  whatever 
quarter  of  the  Union  efforts  shall  be  made 
to  revive  this  sectional  agitation,  Indiana 
is  against  it. 

"Nor  will  she  by  her  votes  countenance 
those  who  favor  the  opening  afresh  in  any 
manner,  under  any  pretense,  the  questions 
so  recently  and  so  happily  disposed  of — 
let  us  hope  forever.  Our  duty  is  plain ; 
abide  by  the  past,  sustain  the  measures 
faithfully,  cease  agitation  and  trust  for  the 
future  to  the  intelligence  and  patriotism  of 
the  people  under  the  guidance  of  Provi- 

This  doubtless  accurately  expressed  the 
sentiment  of  a  vast  majority  of  Indiana's 
inhabitants,  with  but  few  exceptions.  The 
radical  anti-slavery  element  represented 
by  George  W.  Julian  had  no  notable 
strength  outside  the  Julian  district.  Dem- 
ocrats and  Whigs  were  in  entire  accord 
with  Governor  Wright's  views,  as  set  forth 
in  the  foregoing  declaration. 


Prior  to  the  convening  of  the  Demo- 
cratic State  Convention  in  February,  pub- 
lic expression  was  given  to  a  pronounced 
sentiment  in  favor  of  making  Robert  Dale 
Owen  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruc- 
tion. A  strong  editorial  on  that  sub- 
ject appeared  in  the  Louisville  Jour- 
nal, then  edited  by  Geo.  D.  Prentice. 
In  this  editorial  were  set  forth  va- 
rious cogent  reasons  why,  in  the 
opinion  of  Mr.   Prentice,  Indiana  should 

place  at  the  head  of  its  educational  inter- 
ests a  man  of  Mr.  Owen's  superior  qualifi- 
cations. This  article  was  reproduced  in 
the  Sentinel  with  favorable  comment.  The 
publication  of  these  commendatory  refer- 
ences to  Mr.  Owen  prompted  that  gentle- 
man to  declare,  in  a  communication 
printed  in  the  Sentinel  of  December  23, 
that  "on  account  of  private  arrangements 
connected  with  his  duties  to  his  family 
he  could  not  be  a  candidate  for  the  office  of 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction  at 
the  February  convention."  In  the  same 
letter  he  protested  vigorously  the 
exclusion  of  ministers  of  the  gospel  from 
school  positions,  saying  the  schools  are 
"secular  and  not  religious  in.stitutions." 
He  also  objected  emphatically  to  any  ex- 
clusion being  made  on  account  of  any  par- 
ticular religion.  The  latter  objection  was 
evoked  by  the  rising  spirit  of  Know- 
Nothingism  that  had  taken  strong  hold  in 
some  of  the  larger  cities  of  the  Union. 


This  trite  saying  was  strikingly  ex- 
emplified in  the  earlier  period  of  political 
contention.  Judge  Turpie  had  some  such 
experiences  when  he  engaged  in  joint  dis- 
cussions with  some  of  his  competitors.  But 
perhaps  the  most  notable  of  these  close  as- 
sociations was  that  unctuously  related  by 
one  of  the  candidates  for  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor in  1852.  The  rival  aspirants  for  this 
office  were  A-shbel  P.  Willard  of  New  Al- 
bany and  "Billy"  Williams  of  Warsaw. 
Both  were  remarkably  effective  stump 
speakers.  Willard  was  highly  educated 
and  an  ideal  orator.  Williams  was  de- 
ficient in  education,  but  irresistible  as  a 
natural  orator  before  a  popular  audience. 
During  the  seventies,  when  representing 
the  Tenth  district  in  Congress,  "Billy"  told 
the  writer  of  the  time  he  had  with  Willard 
while  going  through  the  arduous  task  of 
a  series  of  joint  discussions.  One  of  these 
wordy  combats  took    place    in    a    locality 

HISTORY      INDIANA     DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

where  hotel  accommodations  were  scant,  divest  himself  of  his  coat,  then  of  his  col- 
It  became  necessary  for  these  two  distin-  lar,  then  of  his  vest.  One  afternoon  he 
guished  disputants  to  occupy  the  same  was  making  a  speech  in  a  Quaker  settle- 
bed.  Both  were  jolly  good  fellows.  Not-  ment.  It  began  to  rain.  People  put  up 
withstanding  the  fact  that  they  belabored  their  umbrellas,  but,  enchanted  by  Wil- 
one  another  at  a  lively  rate  in  their  fiery  lard's  oratory,  they  stayed  and  eagerly 
speeches,  a  strong  personal  friendship  had  drank  in  the  words  as  they  fell  from  his 
sprung  up  between  them.  "Both  of  us  felt  eloquent  lips.  As  the  rain  descended 
tired,"  the  inimitable  Billy  said  in  the  thicker  and  heavier,  the  orator  stopped 
course  of  his  narrative,  "so  it  wasn't  long  abruptly,  appealing  to  his  audience  to  ad- 
after  we  had  gone  to  bed  that  Willard  be-  journ  the  meeting.  With  astonishing 
gan  to  snore  in  stentorian  tones.  Pretty  unanimity  the  crowd  shouted,  'No,  go  on !' 
soon  he  would  turn  over,  throw  his  leg  Speaking  was  renewed.  The  audience  was 
over  me  and  exclaim,  'Billy,  of  all  the  au-  spell-bound.  Three  times  Willard  appealed 
dacious  liars  I  ever  encountered,  you  are  to  his  hearers  to  bring  the  meeting  to  a 
entitled  to  be  enrolled  on  top  of  the  list.'  close.  To  each  request  the  audience  thun- 
Complacently  falling  asleep,  repeating  his  ^e^ed  back  an  emphatic  No!  Straighten- 
snoring  with  reinforced  vigor,  and  again  j^^^  ^-^^^^^  ^^  ^^  ^-^  f^U  ^^-^^^^  ^jU^^d 
throwing  his  leg  over  me,  he  drawled  out,  exclaimed:  'The  more  rain,  the  more 
'Billy,  how  can  you  stand  up  before  an  m-  ^^^^   ^^^  ^^^^           ^^^  ^^^^  ^             ^^^ 

telligent  audience  and  unfold  yourself  as  r,-  n      4.1,              -r*             4.       t   +> 

„,.       o,     A      •      •  •      V  more  whisky,  the  more  Democrats.    Leter 

a  very  prince  of  liars?     Again  giving  him-  .         „,.„      ,„.,.,.             ,       ,,     . 

self  over  to  the  sleep  of  the  righteous,  ^^^^^     Willard  finished  his  speech.    Most 

Willard  soon  again  unconsciously  set  his  «f  his  hearers  were  soaked  by  the  ram,  but 

snoring  apparatus   in  motion.     For  the  they  considered  themselves  amply  compen- 

third  time  he  threw  his  leg  over  me,  this  sated  for  the  discomfort  experienced  by 

time  accompanying  that  performance  with  the  matchless  oratory  of  their  nominee  for 

this  tribute  to  my  veracity :     'Well,  Billy,  Lieutenant-Governor." 

you  are  without  doubt  the  sleekest  liar  I  As   the   inimitable    and    incomparably 

have  ever  come  across.'    How  many  times  good-natured    "Billy"    related    these    in- 

he  reiterated  these  testimonials  during  the  cidents  in  his  political   career   his   coun- 

night  I  am  unable  to  say.    I  was  tired,  ex-  Penance  was  illuminated  as  if  he  had  been 

hausted,  and  became  oblivious  to  all  that  reminded   of   one   of   the   most  pleasing 

happened   or  didn't  happen   during  that  ^^^j^^g  ^^  j^jg  ^fg 

memorable  night  of  joint  bed  occupancy.  ^^^    campaign     made     by     Governor 

When  we  got  up  m  the  morning  there  were  ^           ^^^  ^^  ^.^^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  ^^.j,.^^^ 

no  signs  of  anything  unpleasant  having  ,    ^    ,.         r,^,             ,.. 

occurred.    Continuing  our  battle  of  words,  ^"^  effective.    The  result  was  a  sweeping 

we  fought  it  out  to  the  bitter  end.    Willard  Democratic  victory,  as  attested  by  the  offi- 

had  the  satisfaction  of  beating  me  by  a  cial  figures : 

little  over  15,000,  while  I  had  the  satisfac-  Pqjj  qovernor. 

tion  of  doing  considerably  better  than  the     j^^^^^  ^  ^^.^^^^  ^^^^^^^^ ' 93  ^^g 

head  of  the  ticket,  who  was  defeated  by     Nicholas  McCarty,  Whig 73,641 

over  19,000.     Yes,  those  were  great  days,     Andrew  L.  Robinson,  Freesoiler 3,303 

with  great  doings.    As  a  public  speaker  he  ^^^  LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR, 
was  simply  a  wonder.    He  preferred  out- 

door  to   indoor  speaking.       When    he    got      4^.^bel  P-^,^illard,  Democrat 90,239 

^  "  \Vilham  Williams,  Whig 75,094 

warmed  up  to  his  subject  he  would  first     j^^es  P.  Milliken,  Freesoiler 3,086 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

MAJORITIES  FOR  THE  OTHER  CANDIDATES,  test  over  the  admission  of  Kansas  into  the 

Secretary  of  State— Nehemiah  Hayden 15,134  Union ;  located  in  the  city  of  Indianapolis 

Auditor  of  state— John  p.  Dunn 15,916  during  the   Civil   War;   engaged   in   bank- 
Treasurer  of  State-Elijah  Newland 16,702  jng.  became  president   of   the   First   Na- 

Supt.  of  Public  Instruction— W.  C.  Larabee.  15,851  x-,tji  -jjj-u^ 

Supreme  Judges- Wm.  Z.  Stuart 14,961  i^""^'   ^^"^^ '   ^'^^'^   ^^e   Government   in   a 

Andrew  Davidson 14,212  financial  way.    In  1880  he  developed  Pres- 

Samuel  E.  Perkins 11,545  idential  aspirations,  but  the  state  conven- 

Addison  L.  Roach 12,985  tion  instructed  the  delegation  to  the  Cin- 

Not  only  did  the  Democrats  elect  every  cinnati  convention  steadfastly  to  support 
candidate  on  their  State  ticket  by  decisive  Thomas  A.  Hendricks.  Four  years  before 
majorities,  but  they  secured  a  good  work-  Mr.  English  earnestly  and  energetically 
ing  majority  in  both  Houses  of  the  Legis-  supported  Tilden  and  Hendricks.  Upon 
lature.  In  this  body  they  had  34  Senators  the  nomination  of  General  Winfield  Scott 
and  57  Representatives.  Of  the  eleven  Hancock  to  the  Presidency,  Mr.  English 
members  of  Congress  they  secured  ten.  was  nominated  for  Vice-President.  He  re- 
The  only  Whig  nominee  that  escaped  de-  tained  the  chairmanship  of  the  Democratic 
feat  was  Samuel  W.  Parker,  in  the  Fifth  State  Committee  and  conducted  a  system- 
district.  The  delegation  to  the  Thirty-  atic  campaign.  Though  considerable  en- 
third  Congress  was  made  up  of  these  dis-  thusiasm  was  aroused  in  behalf  of  Han- 
tinguished  gentlemen :  cock  and  English,  the  disappointment  of 

1.  Smith  Miller,  Patoka.  Democrats  who  had  demanded  the  renom- 

2.  Wm.  H.  English,  Lexington.  ination  of  the  ticket  of  1876  was  felt  so 

3.  Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  Valley  Farm.  keenly  that  the  Indiana  Democracy  went 

4.  James  H.  Lane,  Lawrenceburg.  down  in  defeat  both  in  October  and  in  No- 

5.  Samuel  W.  Parker,  Connersville  vember.     Mr.  English  had  become  one  of 

6.  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  Shelbyville.  j.i.     oi   j.   ,  i^i  •     ^  ,,.,,,. 

7.  John  W.  Davis,  Rockville.  ^^e  State  s  wealthiest  men,  and  died  at  his 

8.  Daniel  Mace,  Lafayette.  home  in  Indianapolis,   February   7,   1896. 

9.  Norman  Eddy,  South  Bend.  His  SOU,  William  E.,  during  the  eighties 

10.  Ebenezer  M.  Chamberlain,  Goshen.  served  part  of  a  term  in  Congress.     The 

11.  Andrew  J.  Harlan,  Marion.  fj.^^  gjl^g^  jg^^g  j^^  jggg  ^^^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^^_ 

Smith  Miller  was  born  in  North  Caro-  after  to  affiliate  with  the  Republicans. 
Una,  May  30,  1804;  engaged  in  farming  at  james  Henry  Lane  was  born  in  Law- 
Patoka,  Gibson  county,  Indiana;  served  as  renceburg,  Ind.,  June  22,  1814;  attended 
member  of  the  Legislature  and  was  twice  the  public  schools;  studied  law,  was  ad- 
elected  to  Congress.  Died  near  Patoka,  fitted  to  the  bar  in  1840,  and  began  prac- 
March  21,  1872.  ^-jce  in  Lawrenceburg;  member  of  the  City 

William  Hayden  English  was  the  third  Council;    served    in    the    Mexican    war; 

native  Indianian  to  be  elected  to  Congress.  Colonel  of  the  Third  Indiana  Volunteers, 

Born  m  Lexington,  Scott  county,  August  June  25,  1846 ;  mustered  out  June  24,  1847 ; 

27,  1822;  pursued  classical  studies  in  the  recommissioned  Colonel  of  the  Fifth  In- 

University  of  Hanover;  studied  law  and  diana  Infantry  October  22,  1847 ;  mustered 

was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1846;  principal  ^^^^  j^,y  ^g^   1348;  appointed  Brigadier- 

clerk  ot  the  Indiana  House  of  Representa-  ^  ^     ^  ^r  ^     1.  ^  •       •      .1 

,.        .     ,_.„      1    1    •     iu     rp  T^  General  of  Volunteers  for  service  in  the 

tives  in  1843;  clerk  in  the  Treasury  De-  „.   •,  ,ir      t~>         .         ,0     -.r,,.-.  j 

v^„,^-w,„„f  of  Wo  I,; f^„  -mAA  10A0  Civil  War  December    18,    1861,    and    ap- 

partment  at  Washington,  1844-1848 ;  secre-         .   ,         ,  ,,,,,'. 

tary  of  the  Indiana  Constitutional  Conven-  Pomtment  was  canceled  March  21,  1862  ; 

tion  in  1850 ;  four  times  elected  to  Con-  elected  Lieutenant-Governor  1849 ;  elected 

gress  as  a  Democrat,  serving  from  1853  to  as  a  Democrat  to  the  Thirty-third  Con- 

1861 ;  took  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  con-  gress    (March   4,    1853-March   3,    1855); 



-19  16 

moved  to  Kansas  Territory  in  1855 ;  mem- 
ber of  the  Topeka  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion; elected  to  the  United  States  Senate 
by  the  Legislature  that  convened  under 
the  Topeka  Constitution  in  1856,  but  the 
election  was  not  recognized  by  the  United 
States  Senate;  president  of  the  Leaven- 
worth Constitutional  Convention  of  1857; 
elected  as  a  Republican  to  the  United 
States  Senate  in  1861,  and  re-elected  in 
1865,  and  served  until  his  death  by  suicide 
near  Fort  Leavenworth,  Kan.,  July  11, 

Norman  Eddy  was  born  in  Scipio,  N.  Y., 
December  10,  1810;  was  graduated  from 
the  medical  department  of  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania  in  1835 ;  went  to  Indiana 
and  located  in  Mishawaka  and  practiced 
medicine  there  until  1847;  studied  law, 
moved  to  South  Bend  in  1847  and  prac- 
ticed law ;  State  Senator  in  1850 ;  held  sev- 
eral local  offices ;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to 

the  Thirty-third  Congress  (March  4,  1853- 
March  3,  1855)  ;  defeated  for  re-election; 
Colonel  of  the  Forty-eighth  Indiana  Regi- 
ment of  Volunteers  during  the  Civil  War ; 
Collector  of  Internal  Revenue  1865-1870; 
elected  Secretary  of  State  in  1870.  Died 
in  Indianapolis,  January  28,  1872. 

Ebenezer  Mattoon  Chamberlain  was 
born  in  Orrington,  Me.,  August  20,  1805; 
attended  the  public  schools;  studied  law; 
moved  to  Connersville,  Ind.,  in  1832, 
where  he  completed  his  studies;  was  ad-' 
mitted  to  the  bar  and  commenced  practice 
in  Elkhart  county  in  1833 ;  member  of  the 
State  House  of  Representatives  in  1835- 
1837;  judge  of  the  Elkhart  Circuit  Court 
for  nine  years;  elected  as  a  Democrat  to 
the  Thirty-third  Congress  (March  4,  1853- 
March  3,  1855)  ;  was  strongly  opposed  to 
the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  compromise ;  re- 
sumed the  practice  of  law  in  Goshen. 
Died  there  March  14,  1861. 

(  n>o ) 

[Chapter  XX.] 



HILE  the  Indiana  Democratic 
Convention  held  at  Indiana- 
polis, February  24,  did  not 
specifically  instruct  its  dele- 
gates to  the  National  Conven- 
tion, as  usual,  held  in  Balti- 
jd|  more,  June  1,  1852,  it  adopted 
with  the  utmost  unanimity  these  resolu- 
tions : 

"Resolved,  That  Joseph  Lane,  the  State 
legislator,  the  gallant  general,  the  Terri- 
torial Governor,  tried  in  the  council  cham- 
ber, tried  in  the  tented  fields,  tried  in  the 
executive  chair,  and  never  found  granting, 
is,  of  the  people  of  Indiana,  the  first  choice 
for  the  Presidency.  While  we  repose  en- 
tire confidence  alike  in  his  administrative 
capacity,  in  his  firmness,  in  his  honesty  of 
purpose  and  in  his  unswerving  devotion 
to  Democratic  principles,  at  the  same  time 
desiring  above  all  things  union  and  har- 
mony in  the  support  of  the  nominee  of  the 
National  Convention,  let  the  choice  of  the 
majority  fall  as  it  will,  and  fully  trusting 
the  judgment  and  devotion  to  principles 
of  our  delegates  to  that  convention. 

"Resolved  further,  That  we  leave  said 
delegates  untrammeled  by  instructions  as 
to  persons  to  act  as  their  convictions  of 
right  and  propriety  at  the  time  may  dic- 

"Resolved,  however,  That  in  casting  the 
vote  of  the  State  for  President,  the  said 
delegates  be  instructed  to  give  it,  through- 
out, as  a  unit  and  not  by  separate  dis- 
tricts ;  the  name  of  the  person  so  voted  for 
to  be  at  all  times  determined  by  the  ma- 
jority of  the  votes  of  said  delegates. 

"Resolved,  That  if  General  Joseph 
Lane  be  the  Democratic  nominee  for  Pres- 
ident of  the  National  Convention,  we 
pledge  to  him  the  vote  of  Indiana — of  that 
State  the  honor  of  whose  sons  he  has  so 
nobly  vindicated — by  a  majority,  as  we 
confidently  hope  and  truly  believe,  of 
25,000  votes." 

It  is  worthy  of  special  mention  that 
these  resolutions  were  reported  by  an  ex- 

ceptionally strong  committee  of  which  the 
renowned  Robert  Dale  Owen  was  chair- 
man and  Oliver  P.  Morton  a  conspicuous 
member  from  the  "Quaker  district." 
Four  years  later  the  same  Morton  headed 
the  first  Republican  State  ticket  as  its 
nominee  for  Governor,  and  ten  years  later 
Robert  Dale  Owen  was  credited  with  hav- 
ing furnished  the  strongest  argument  sub- 
mitted to  President  Lincoln  in  support  of 
the  urgent  appeal  that  he  issue  a  procla- 
mation for  the  emancipation  of  four  mil- 
lion slaves.  At  this  very  convention  both 
Owen  and  Morton  expressed  the  utmost 
satisfaction  over  the  various  compromises 
entered  into  to  propitiate  the  slave  power 
and  condemning  all  further  agitation  that 
might  in  any  way  disturb  harmonious  re- 
lations between  North  and  South. 

Upon  one  of  Indiana's  delegates-at- 
large.  Congressman  John  W.  Davis,  was 
conferred  the  distinguished  honor  of  be- 
ing selected  as  permanent  chairman  of 
the  convention.  And  very  creditably  did 
Dr.  Davis  acquit  himself  in  that  position. 
He,  with  a  number  of  other  delegates, 
loyally  supported  General  Lane  for  the 
Presidential  nomination,  but  at  heart 
these  gentlemen  were  for  Stephen  A. 
Douglas.  When  the  balloting  showed 
steady  gains  for  "The  Little  Giant,"  the 
Indiana  delegation  abandoned  Lane  and 
went  over  to  Cass  as  a  compromise.  Par- 
ticularly active  in  behalf  of  General  Lane 
was  Congressman  John  L.  Robinson,  ably 
aided  by  the  Brights.  These  gentlemen 
were  especially  hostile  to  Senator  Douglas, 
whose  defeat  was  of  far  greater  impor- 
tance to  them  than  the  nomination  of  any 
one  of  the  other  aspirants,  except  Lane. 

All  the  signs  of  the  times  pointed  un- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

erringly  to  signal  Democratic  victories  in 
1852,  both  in  Indiana  and  the  country  at 
large.  This  in  itself  was  an  incentive  to 
extraordinary  effort  in  behalf  of  the  lead- 
ing candidates  and  accounts  for  the  tenac- 
ity with  which  their  supporters  adhered 
to  the  favorite  sons  from  various  parts  of 
the  Union.  The  friends  of  General  Cass, 
convinced  that  the  battle  in  1848  was  lost 
through  no  fault  of  his  but  rendered  in- 
evitable on  account  of  the  colossal  blunder 
committed  in  inciting  the  friends  of  Mar- 
tin Van  Buren  to  open  revolt,  were  espe- 
cially solicitous  that  the  Michigan  states- 
man be  afforded  another  opportunity  in  a 
fairer  race  and  under  more  auspicious 
circumstances.  But  the  decree  of  fate 
determined  otherwise.  General  Cass  de- 
veloped considerable  strength,  but  the 
persistent  efforts  of  the  followers  of  Bu- 
chanan, Douglas  and  Marcy  made  it  im- 
possible to  bring  his  vote  beyond  the  131 
point.  Thirty-three  times  the  Indiana 
delegation  cast  its  vote  solidly  for  General 
Joseph  Lane,  but  throughout  that  ballot- 
ing only  one  delegate  from  some  other 
State  came  to  his  support.  The  name  of 
Franklin  Pierce  had  not  been  mentioned 
until  the  thirty-fifth  ballot.  He  started 
then  with  15  votes,  rose  to  30  on  the  next, 
then  dropped  to  29,  and  stayed  at  that 
through  eight  ballots.  Then  he  rose  to 
44,  49,  55,  then  came  the  stampede  that 
gave  him  nearly  the  entire  vote  of  the  con- 
vention and  secured  his  triumphant  nom- 

Inasmuch  as  Joseph  Lane  was  the  first 
Indiana  Democrat  presented  for  a  Presi- 
dential nomination,  a  brief  review  of  his 
eventful  career  would  seem  to  be  de- 
manded. He  was  a  native  of  Buncombe 
county,  North  Carolina,  where  he  was 
born  in  the  year  1801.  In  1814  his  father's 
family  emigrated  to  Kentucky,  and  two 
years  afterward  crossed  the  Ohio  river 
and  located  in  Warrick  county,  Indiana. 
Alternately  young  Lane  worked  in  the 
county  clerk's  office  and  in  a  dry  goods 

store.  Before  he  was  twenty-one  years 
old  he  was  elected  to  the  Legislature,  and 
he  had  to  wait  until  he  became  of  age  be- 
fore he  could  take  his  seat.  For  over 
twenty-five  years  he  served  the  State  as  a 
member  of  either  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives or  the  Senate  of  the  Indiana 
Legislature.  When  the  Mexican  war 
broke  out  he  resigned  his  seat  in  the  State 
Senate,  where  he  was  then  serving,  and 
joined  the  command  of  Captain  Walker 
as  a  private.  When  the  Second  Indiana 
Regiment  was  organized  he  was  made 
Colonel,  and  on  July  1,  1846,  he  was  made 
Brigadier-General  by  President  Polk. 
During  the  war  he  served  with  distinction 
under  Taylor  and  Scott  and  he  com- 
manded at  the  battle  of  Huamantla.  Soon 
after  the  close  of  the  war  he  was  ap- 
pointed by  President  Polk  Governor  of 
the  Territory  of  Oregon.  In  1850  he  was 
removed  from  that  office  by  President 
Taylor,  but  the  next  year  was  elected  as  a 
delegate  from  Oregon  to  Congress  and 
continued  as  such  until  the  State  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  Union,  when  he  became  Sen- 
ator. In  1860  he  was  nominated  for  the 
Vice-Presidency  by  one  wing  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  on  a  ticket  with  John  C. 
Breckinridge,  of  Kentucky. 

Mr.  Lane  died  in  1881  in  the  forest  re- 
gion of  his  beloved  adopted  State,  poor  in 
purse,  but  rich  in  the  esteem  and  con- 
fidence of  his  countrymen. 


On  the  second  ballot  William  K.  King 
of  Alabama  was  unanimously  nominated 
for  the  Vice-Presidency. 

The  party  platform  adopted  was  worded 
precisely  as  that  of  1848.  Two  additional 
planks  were  added — one  approving  the 
compromise  measures  patched  up  by  Clay, 
Webster,  Fillmore,  Crittenden,  Douglas, 
etc.  The  final  declaration  was  to  the  effect 
"that  the  Democratic  party  will  resist  all 
attempts  at  renewing  in  Congress,  or  out 




of  it,  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  question, 
under  whatever  shape  or  color  the  attempt 
may  be  made."  The  nomination  of  Gen- 
eral Franklin  Pierce  was  very  generally 
greeted  with  enthusiasm,  especially  by  the 
younger  element  of  the  party.  Most  of  the 
Freesoil  Democrats  who  had  rallied  to  the 
support  of  Van  Buren  and  Adams  in  1848 
enlisted  under  the  banner  of  Pierce  and 
King  and  contributed  their  mite  to  the 
sweeping  victory  the  following  November. 

The  remainder  of  the  story  of  1852  is 
easily  narrated.  Confused,  chagrined  and 
demoralized,  the  Whigs  met  in  Baltimore 
on  the  16th  of  June,  with  every  State  rep- 
resented. John  G.  Chapman  of  Maryland 
was  made  the  presiding  officer. 

As  narrated  by  Col.  A.  K.  McClure,  "the 
Southern  delegates  fortified  themselves 
before  the  meeting  of  the  convention  by  a 
caucus  declaration  of  the  party  platform, 
and  it  was  an  open  secret  that  if  the  con- 
vention accepted  the  platform,  enough 
Southern  men  would  support  Scott  to  give 
him  the  nomination.  They  knew  that  Fill- 
more could  not  be  elected  and  that  Web- 
ster was  even  weaker  than  Fillmore,  and 
they  were  willing  to  accept  Scott,  who  was 
the  candidate  of  the  anti-slavery  element 
of  the  party,  if  the  compromise  measures 
were  squarely  affirmed  by  the  party  con- 
vention, while  Scott  was  willing  to  accept 
the  nomination  with  any  platform  the  con- 
vention might  formulate.  Fillmore  had 
carried  the  compromise  measures  and 
forced  the  Whigs  to  accept  them  in  the 
party  platform,  but  the  insincerity  of  that 
expression  was  manifested  by  the  refusal 
to  nominate  Fillmore,  and  by  the  nomina- 
tion of  Scott,  who  represented  the  anti- 
compromise  Whigs  of  the  country.  There 
were  53  ballots  for  President,  but  during 
the  long  struggle  there  was  but  little  ex- 
hibition of  ill-temper.  Scott  started  with 
131  to  133  for  Fillmore  and  29  for  Web- 
ster, and  ended  with  159  for  Scott  to  112 
for  Fillmore  and  21  for  Webster." 

The  nomination  of  General  Scott  was 

made  unanimous,  and  William  A.  Graham 
of  North  Carolina,  who  was  then  serving 
as  Secretary  of  the  Navy  under  the  Fill- 
more administration,  was  considerately 
given  a  unanimous  nomination  for  Vice- 
President  on  the  second  ballot. 

The  platfoi'm  adopted  by  the  convention 
declared  that — 

"The  Union  should  be  revered  and 
watched  over  as  the  palladium  of  our  lib- 

"As  the  people  make  and  control  the 
Government,  they  should  obey  its  consti- 
tution, laws  and  treaties  as  they  would  I'e- 
tain  their  self-respect  and  the  respect 
which  they  claim  and  will  enforce  from 
foreign  powers." 

"The  Federal  and  State  Governments 
are  parts  of  one  system,  alike  necessary 
for  the  common  prosperity,  peace  and 
security,  and  ought  to  be  regarded  alike 
with  a  cordial,  habitual  and  immovable 

"The  series  of  acts  of  the  Thirty-second 
Congress,  the  act  known  as  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law  included,  are  received  and 
acquiesced  in  by  the  Whig  party." 


The  Freesoil  Democrats  held  their  na- 
tional convention  in  Pittsburgh  on  the  11th 
of  August.  Henry  Wilson,  of  Massachu- 
setts, presided.  Without  the  formality  of 
a  ballot.  Senator  John  P.  Hale  of  New 
Hampshire  was  nominated  for  President 
and  Congressman  George  W.  Julian  of  In- 
diana for  Vice-President.  Reiterating  the 
declaration  of  1848,  the  platform  declared 

"Slavery  is  a  sin  against  God  and  a 
crime  against  man,  which  no  human  en- 
actment nor  usage  can  make  right." 

"The  Fugitive  Slave  Law  of  1850  is  re- 
pugnant to  the  Constitution ;  we  therefore 
deny  its  binding  force  on  the  American 
people  and  demand  its  immediate  and 
total  repeal." 



-19  1 

"Slavery  is  sectional  and  freedom  na- 

"We  recommend  the  amicable  settle- 
ment of  (international)  difficulties  by  a 
resort  to  decisive  arbitrations." 

"The  Free  Democratic  party  is  not  or- 
ganized to  aid  either  the  Whig  or  Demo- 
cratic wing  of  the  great  slave  compromise 
party  of  the  Nation,  but  to  defeat  them 

On  the  popular  vote  the  Democrats  had 
1,838,169;  the  Whigs  1,380,576;  Free  De- 
mocracy 156,149.  Of  the  electoral  vote 
Pierce  and  King  had  254 ;  Scott  and  Gra- 
ham 42 ;  Hale  and  Julian  none.  Scott  and 
Graham  carried  four  States:  Kentucky, 
12;  Massachusetts,  13;  Tennessee,  12; 
Vermont,  5. 

Badly  as  the  grizzly  warrior,  Scott,  was 
defeated  in  this  contest,  it  will  be  observed 
that  he  carried  twice  as  many  States  as, 
fifty-six  years  later,  were  carried  by  Wil- 
liam Howard  Taft.  No  comparison  is  to 
be  made  between  these  two  men  as  to  fit- 

ness and  qualification.  The  vote  of  In- 
diana stood:  95,340  for  Pierce,  80,901 
for  Scott,  6,929  for  Hale— total,  183,170. 
Franklin  Pierce  was  by  far  better  fitted 
for  the  Presidency  than  was  his  chief  com- 
petitor. Born  in  Hillsboro,  N.  H.,  Novem- 
ber 23,  1804;  graduated  from  Bowdoin 
College  in  1824;  studied  law  and  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar  in  1827 ;  member  of  the 
State  House  of  Representatives  1829- 
1833 ;  served  as  Speaker  1832-1833 ;  twice 
elected  to  Congress;  elected  to  the  United 
States  Senate  and  served  from  March  4, 
1837,  to  February  28,  1842,  when  he  re- 
signed. Resumed  the  practice  of  law  in 
Concord;  served  in  the  Mexican  war  as 
Colonel;  commissioned  Brigadier-General 
in  March,  1847,  and  remained  in  Mexico 
until  the  close  of  the  war.  In  1850  he  was 
chosen  a  member  of  the  Constitutional 
Convention  and  made  president  of  that 
body.  His  triumphant  election  to  the 
Presidency  in  1852  marked  the  beginning 
of  the  end  of  the  Whig  party. 

[Chapter  XXI.] 


P  to  the  time  when  Benjamin  F. 

UJ  Shively  was  elected  to  the 
United  States  Senate  it  was 
commonly  remarked  that  no 
man  living  north  of  the  Wa- 
bash river  had  served  in  the 
upper  branch  of  Congress. 
Had  that  declaration  been  so  modified  as 
to  render  it  that  no  man  residing  north  of 
the  Wabash  had,  prior  to  Mr.  Shively's 
selection,  been  elected  a  United  States  Sen- 
ator, the  accuracy  of  the  statement  would 
have  been  incontestable  —  though  the 
somewhat  qualifying  statement  should  not 
be  lost  sight  of  that  three  United  States 
Senators  were  chosen  from  Logansport, 
which  is  located  along  the  Wabash,  in  the 
persons  of  John  Tipton,  Graham  N.  Fitch 
and  Daniel  D.  Pratt,  and  one  from  Lafay- 
ette, also  a  Wabash  river  town,  in  the  per- 
son of  John  Pettit. 

Governor  Whitcomb  was  elected  to  the 
United  States  Senate  in  1848  and  took  his 
seat  in  that  body  March  4,  1849.  He  was 
not  in  robust  health,  grew  steadily  worse, 
and  died  October  4,  1852.  Governor  Jo- 
seph A.  Wright  appointed  as  Whitcomb's 
successor  a  former  Congressman  from  the 
northern  part  of  the  State,  Charles  W. 
Cathcart,  of  Laporte  county,  who  took  his 
seat  upon  the  assembling  of  Congress,  De- 
cember 6,  1852.  When  the  Legislature  of 
1853  assembled  a  lively  contest  ensued 
over  the  selection  of  a  candidate  for  the 
temporarily  filled  Senatorship.  For  some 
unexplained  reason  no  effort  was  made  to 
secure  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Cathcart  by 
the  legislative  caucus.  The  friends  of 
Governor  Wright  rallied  to  the  support  of 
Judge  John  Pettit,  of  Lafayette,  while  the 
adherents  of  Senator  Bright  did  their  ut- 
most to  secure  the  caucus  nomination  for 
Dr.  Graham  N.  Fitch,  of  Logansport.  The 

vote  stood  54  for  Pettit  and  46  for  Fitch. 
Pettit  was  duly  elected  January  11  and 
took  his  seat  just  one  week  later,  viz., 
January  18,  1853.  Then  Charles  W.  Cath- 
cart was  relieved  of  Senatorial  duties,  his 
service  extending  over  exactly  forty-two 
days.  Having  previously  served  two 
terms  as  Representative  in  the  Lower 
House,  he  enjoyed  a  distinction  not  often 
conferred  upon  national  legislators.  His 
career  as  man  and  public  official  is  replete 
with  interest  and  presents  instructive  in- 
formation as  to  the  possibilities  of  forg- 
ing ahead  in  this  land  of  unsurpassed  op- 

Charles  W.  Cathcart  was  born  on  the 
island  of  Madeira,  July  24,  1809.  Re- 
ceived a  good  education  in  the  Catholic 
schools  of  the  country  where  he  was  born, 
and  in  his  early  years  took  to  the  sea  and 
became  a  master  of  the  science  and  art  of 
navigation.  He  worked  as  a  ship  carpen- 
ter, going  once  to  Greenock,  Scotland. 
Meantime  his  parents  had  come  to  reside 
in  Washington,  D.  C,  where,  after  various 
adventures  on  sea  and  land,  Charles  joined 
them,  and  went  to  work  for  the  chief 
clerk  in  the  General  Land  Office.  That  en- 
gagement opened  his  eyes  to  the  advan- 
tages of  the  great  West,  so  in  1831  he  came 
to  Indiana,  reaching  the  State  on  foot. 
He  went  first  to  the  community  of  Robert 
Dale  Owen  at  New  Harmony,  with  whom 
he  seems  to  have  been  acquainted.  Hear- 
ing there  of  the  beauties  and  attractions 
of  the  northwestern  part  of  the  State,  he 
resumed  his  journey  and  reached  Laporte 
county.  He  first  located  at  South  Bend, 
worked  awhile  at  Niles,  then  settled  in 
Laporte  county,  completed  the  survey  on 
the  Michigan  road  lands  under  Judge 
Polk,  which  had  been  undertaken  by  his 
son,  Adam  Polk,  afterwards  Sheriff'  of  La- 

(  155  ) 


-19  16 

porte  county,  and  when  the  land  sale  at 
Logansport  took  place  he  purchased  the 
lands  in  New  Durham  township  where 
ever  afterward  he  had  his  home.  Being  a 
carpenter,  he  worked  at  his  trade  in  and 
about  Laporte,  and  had  several  interest- 
ing experiences  during  the  Blackhawk 
war.  Mr.  Cathcart  was  afterward  ap- 
pointed clerk  in  the  Land  Office  at  Laporte 
by  John  M.  Lemon,  receiver,  whose  daugh- 
ter, Josephine,  he  made  his  wife.  After 
his  marriage  Mr.  Cathcart  engaged  exten- 
sively in  farming,  at  which  he  was  very 
successful.  At  the  time  of  his  death,  Au- 
gust 22,  1888,  he  was  justly  regarded  one 
of  the  county's  foremost  farmers. 

In  1835  Mr.  Cathcart  became  a  Repre- 
sentative in  the  State  Legislature,  issuing 
during  his  campaign  a  frank  statement  of 
his  position,  which  was  published  in  the 
Michigan  City  Gazette.  He  ran  for  State 
Senator  on  the  Democratic  ticket  in  1840, 
but  was  defeated,  and  was  defeated  for 
Representative  in  1843,   but   was   chosen 

district  elector  in  the  Polk  and  Dallas 
campaign  of  1844.  He  served  in  Congress 
from  1845  to  1847,  defeating  Judge  Sam- 
ple, of  South  Bend,  and  was  re-elected  in 
1847,  in  this  contest  defeating  Daniel  D. 
Pratt,  who  later  on  became  a  United 
States  Senator.  Mr.  Cathcart  was  ap- 
pointed United  States  Senator  in  place  of 
James  Whitcomb,  deceased,  serving  from 
December  6,  1852,  to  January  18,  1853. 
He  was  pitted  against  Schuyler  Colfax  for 
Congress  in  1860,  but  was  unsuccessful. 
In  the  following  canvass  he  took  the  stump 
as  a  War  Democrat  in  advocacy  of  Mr. 
Colfax's  Congressional  candidacy,  and  his 
efforts  proved  quite  a  factor  in  that  gentle- 
man's election.  Though  not  what  is  com- 
monly called  an  orator,  Mr.  Cathcart  was 
a  power  on  the  stump.  When  the  war 
broke  out  he  promptly  took  the  side  of  his 
country,  and  his  patriotism  was  manifest 
throughout  the  entire  struggle  for  the 
preservation  of  the  Union. 


[Chapter  XXII.] 




MONG    the    difficult    problems 

AIm  which  confronted  the  founders 
I  of  this  Republic  in  establish- 
1  ing  a  new  power  among  the 
nations  of  the  earth  and  mak- 
ing its  government  conform  to 
the  new  ideals  that  had  been 
evol\  ed  in  the  New  World,  none  were  more 
difficult  of  solution  than  the  question  of 
slavery  and  that  of  the  proper  spheres  of 
State  and  Federal  authority.  Both  prob- 
lems were  attacked  in  the  true  English 
spirit  of  opportunism  and  compromise — 
an  endeavor  to  surmount  the  present  diffi- 
culty and  satisfy  all  parties.  It  is  a  note- 
worthy fact  that  both  these  problems  were 
finally  solved  at  the  same  time  and  by  the 
same  means — the  force  of  arms. 

In  the  earlier  days,  however,  there  was 
greater  difference  of  opinion  on  the  re- 
spective authority  of  the  State  and  the 
Nation  than  there  was  on  the  slavery 
question.  Even  during  Washington's  first 
administration  pai'ty  lines  were  drawn  be- 
tween Federalists  and  anti-Federalists, 
and  more  intense  partisan  bitterness  has 
never  existed  than  was  manifested  by 
these  two  organizations  before  the  close 
of  the  eighteenth  century. 

Slavery,  on  the  other  hand,  was  recog- 
nized by  all  as  an  evil  and  an  anomaly  in 
a  free  government,  and  the  only  diff'er- 
ences  that  existed  were  as  to  the  best 
methods  of  securing  its  ultimate  extinc- 
tion. The  best  exposition  of  the  feelings 
and  purposes  of  the  fathers  on  this  ques- 
tion is  given  in  the  address  issued  by  the 
Democratic  legislators  of  New  York  State 
at  the  close  of  the  session  of  1848.  It  has 
been  termed  the  "First  Gun  for  Freesoil," 

and  was  the  joint  production  of  Samuel  J. 
Tilden,  Martin  Van  Buren  and  the  latter's 
son,  "Prince"  John.  By  ample  quotations 
it  showed  that  thei'e  was  no  sectionalism 
in  the  attitude  of  the  founders  of  the  Re- 
public in  regard  to  slaveiy.  All  consid- 
ered it  as  an  evil  and  looked  to  its  ultimate 
elimination.  The  only  differences  of  opin- 
ion were  as  to  the  means  of  bringing  about 
the  desired  result. 

The  ethical  side  was  epitomized  in  the 
words  of  Jefferson :  "I  tremble  for  my 
country  when-  I  remember  that  God  is 
just."  Patrick  Henry  voiced  the  wish  and 
faith  of  all  in  these  words :  "I  believe  the 
time  will  come  when  an  opportunity  will 
be  offered  to  abolish  this  lamentable  evil. 
Everything  we  can  do  is  to  improve  the 
opportunity,  if  it  happens  in  our  day;  if 
not,  let  us  transmit  to  our  descendants,  to- 
gether with  our  slaves,  a  pity  for  their  un- 
happy lot  and  an  abhorrence  of  slavery." 
The  practical  mind  of  Washington  sug- 
gested the  method  of  action :  "I  can  only 
say  there  is  not  a  man  living  who  wishes 
more  sincerely  than  I  do  to  see  a  plan 
adopted  for  the  abolition  of  slavery.  But 
there  is  only  one  proper  and  effectual 
mode  by  which  it  can  be  accomplished,  and 
that  is  by  the  legislative  authority;  and 
this,  so  far  as  my  suffrage  will  go,  shall 
not  be  wanting." 

The  plan  of  Washington  was  put  into 
effect.  The  abolishment  of  slavery  within 
its  borders  was  conceded  to  be  the  affair 
of  each  State.  But  the  matter  of  importa- 
tion of  slaves  and  the  status  of  the  institu- 
tion in  the  territories  was  vested  in  the 
general  Government.  The  Federal  Con- 
stitution, which  is  the  organic  law  of  the 




Nation,  provided  that  the  slave  trade 
might  be  abolished  at  the  end  of  tw^enty 
years;  and  it  was  so  terminated  by  Con- 
gressional action.  Indeed,  so  careful  were 
the  framers  of  the  Constitution  to  avoid 
even  a  recognition  of  the  system  that  the 
word  "slave"  or  "slavery"  does  not  appear 
in  it,  "because,"  in  the  words  of  Madison, 
"they  did  not  choose  to  admit  the  right  of 
property  in  man;"  moreover,  by  giving  a 
three-fifths  representation  for  the  persons 
held  in  servitude,  the  Constitution  lifted 
the  bondmen  above  the  grade  of  mere 
chattels,  and  one  of  the  first  acts  of  Con- 
gress was  to  reaffirm  the  ''"Ordinance  of 
1787" — written  by  Jefferson — prohibiting 
slavery  forever  in  the  territory,  ceded  by 
Virginia,  north  of  the  Ohio  and  east  of 
the  Mississippi.  In  1793  the  first  Con- 
gressional action  towards  allaying  ill- 
feeling  between  the  States  resulted  in  the 
enactment  of  a  law  providing  for  the  re- 
turn of  fugitives  from  one  State  into  an- 
other. This  law  was  popularly  known  as 
the  "fugitive  slave  law,"  although  its  pro- 
visions related  to  fugitives  from  justice  or 
involuntary  servitude. 

From  the  beginning  the  ethical  consid- 
eration of  the  question  of  slavery  was 
complicated  by  the  financial  interests  in- 
volved. The  respite  of  twenty  years  given 
the  African  slave  trade  was  a  concession 
to  the  shipowners  and  slave  traders  of  the 
northern  cities,  and  the  abolition  of  slav- 
ery in  the  northern  States  was  much  facil- 
itated by  the  fact  that  slave  labor  did  not 
prove  profitable  in  that  section.  Neither 
was  that  kind  of  labor  particularly  profit- 
able at  the  South  until  after  the  invention 
of  the  cotton  gin.  But  for  the  mechanical 
genius  of  Whitney,  it  is  possible  that  the 
"opportunity"  hoped  for  by  Patrick  Henry 
might  have  arrived  during  the  lifetime  of 
Jeff"erson,  and  slavery  might  have  been 
abolished  by  the  voluntary  action  of  all 
the  States,  according  to  the  plan  suggested 
by  Washington. 

The  rapid  growth  of  the  cotton  industry 

having  given  impetus  to  slavery  in  the 
South,  Congress,  in  its  legislation  for  the 
Territories,  recognized  the  institution  in 
that  part  of  the  country  lying  south  of  the 
Ohio  and  east  of  the  Mississippi.  The 
State  of  Louisiana  was  also  admitted  in 
1812  with  a  constitution  authorizing  slav- 
ery. The  States  just  north  of  the  cotton- 
producing  region  also  found  it  profitable 
to  raise  slaves  for  sale  to  the  Southern 
planters.  In  the  meantime  an  abolition 
sentiment  had  been  growing  in  the  north- 
ern States.  The  North  had  not  only  freed 
its  own  slaves,  but  was  becoming  active  in 
opposition  to  any  further  extension  of 
slavery  in  the  Union.  Out  of  this  conflict 
of  interests  and  ethical  views  a  variety  of 
opinions  as  to  the  system  was  developed 
and  tenaciously  maintained  North  and 
South.  The  unanimity  of  opinion  held  by 
the  founders  of  the  Republic  was  replaced 
by  a  diversity  of  views  in  which  each 
sought  to  justify  his  own  on  moral 
grounds.  One  class  believed  in  the  right 
of  a  superior  race  to  dominate  an  inferior 
one  and  boldly  asserted  that  slavery  was 
not  only  a  humane  institution,  but  had 
divine  sanction  as  a  civilizing  instrument 
to  elevate  the  negro  from  his  native  state 
of  savagery.  This  view  was  held  by  in- 
fluential religious  organizations  at  the 
South  and  proclaimed  from  the  pulpit  and 
through  the  press.  It  was  also  held  by 
these  that  the  slave  was  better  oflF  than 
the  free  negro  "running  at  large."  An- 
other class  deprecated  the  existence  of 
slavery,  but  contended  that  since  it  had 
been  an  established  institution  from  the 
formation  of  the  Union,  there  should  be 
no  interference  with  it.  Still  another 
class  held  that  since  slavery  existed  law- 
fully in  certain  States,  legal  protection  of 
the  property  rights  of  the  slaveholder  was 
proper  and  necessary,  but  that  there  must 
be  no  extension  of  slavery  into  new  terri- 
tory. Then  there  was  a  fourth  class,  in- 
significant in  numbers,  it  is  true,  but  in- 
sistent in  proclaiming    its    views,    which 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

held  that  slavery  was  wholly  and  totally 
wrong,  "the  sum  of  all  villainies,"  and 
that,  therefore,  it  had  become  a  public 
duty  to  abolish  the  institution.  In  the 
course  of  the  controversy  the  foremost 
champions  of  this  last  view  were  William 
Lloyd  Garrison.  Joshua  R.  Giddings,  Ger- 
rit  Smith,  Wendell  Phillips  and  Owen 

In  addition  to  the  moral  and  economical 
aspects  of  the  controversy,  political  com- 
plications arose.  The  slaveholding  inter- 
ests demanded  that  equality  of  representa- 
tion should  be  maintained  in  the  Senate — 
that  is,  that  for  every  free  State  admitted 
there  should  be  a  corresponding  one  per- 
mitting slavery.  This  balance  of  power 
had  remained  until  1820,  when  Maine  and 
Missouri  applied  for  admission  into  the 
Union.  Missouri  was  formed  out  of  the 
"Louisiana  Purchase,"  to  which  the  North 
claimed  that  the  provisions  of  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1787  should  be  applied.  The 
South,  however,  insisted  that  if  Maine 
were  admitted  as  a  free  State,  Missouri 
should  also  come  in  as  a  slave  State.  The 
controversy  became  very  bitter;  but  the 
matter  was  finally  adjusted  by  admitting 
the  two  on  the  basis  of  the  Southern  de- 
mand, but  accompanying  their  admission 
with  a  solemn  compact  that  all  other  terri- 
tory west  of  the  Mississippi  and  north  of 
the  parallel  of  the  south  line  of  Missouri 
should  be  placed  under  the  inhibition  of 
the  Ordinance  of  1787;  that  is,  it  should 
be  forever  free.  This  measure  became 
known  as  the  "Missouri  Compromise." 
Jefferson  did  not  approve  of  the  compro- 
mise. "I  consider  it,"  he  said,  "the  knell 
of  the  Union.  A  geographical  line  coin- 
ciding with  a  marked  principle,  moral  and 
political,  once  conceived  and  held  up  to 
the  angry  passions  of  men  will  never  be 
obliterated."  Prophetic  words!  The  ob- 
literation was  secured  only  through  the 
blood  of  thousands  of  Americans. 

While  agitation  and  discussion  both 
within  and  without  the  halls  of  Congress 

waxed  hot  and  bitter,  no  action  of  impor- 
tance affecting  the  slavery  question  was 
taken  until  the  war  with  Mexico  rendered 
probable  the  acquisition  of  territory  from 
that  country.  It  is  true  that  Texas,  having 
secured  her  independence,  had  been  on  her 
own  request  admitted  into  the  Union  as  a 
slave  State,  as  also  had  been  Arkansas,  but 
there  had  been  Northern  States  admitted 
also.  The  war  with  Mexico  had,  indeed, 
grown  out  of  the  admission  of  Texas. 

Inasmuch  as  slavery  had  been  aboli.shed 
in  Mexico,  the  question  as  to  the  territory 
to  be  obtained  from  that  country  involved 
leaving  things  as  they  were,  or  the  estab- 
lishment of  slavery  in  communities  where 
it  did  not  exist — and  anti-slavery  feeling 
in  the  North  was  thoroughly  aroused.  In 
1846,  when  the  bill  appropriating  money 
for  the  expenses  of  the  war  was  before  the 
House  of  Representatives,  David  Wilmot, 
a  Democrat  from  Pennsylvania,  offered  an 
amendment  providing  that  slavery  should 
be  forever  prohibited  in  any  territory  that 
might  be  acquired  as  the  result  of  the  war. 
This  was  the  famous  "Wilmot  Proviso." 
It  was  adopted  by  the  House  but  rejected 
in  the  Senate. 

In  1848  the  Democratic  State  Conven- 
tion of  New  York  adopted  the  principle  of 
the  Wilmot  Proviso  and  passed  resolutions 
protesting  against  the  establishment  of 
slavery  in  any  of  the  Territories.  This 
action  of  the  New  York  Democracy  awak- 
ened bitter  antagonism  in  pro-slavery 
circles  and  resulted  in  sending  a  contest- 
ing delegation  from  the  Empire  State  to 
the  Democratic  National  Convention. 
That  convention,  after  two  days'  delibera- 
tion, resolved  to  admit  both  delegations 
from  New  York,  each  with  half  the  vote 
of  the  State.  This  proposition  was  in- 
dignantly declined  by  the  Van  Buren  men, 
whereupon  the  "Hunker"  contestants, 
headed  by  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  though  sit- 
ting in  the  convention,  took  no  part  in  the 
voting.  General  Lewis  Cass  was  nom- 
mated  for  President.  Then  followed  the 
Freesoil  Democratic  party  with  Van  Buren 


HISTORY     INDIANA     DEMOCRACY  — 1816-19  1 

as  the  nominee  for  President  and  Charles 
Francis  Adams  for  Vice-President.  The 
result  was  the  election  of  the  Whig  candi- 
date, Zachary  Taylor. 

In  the  meantime  the  struggle  increaseid 
in  bitterness.  California,  rapidly  filling 
up  with  miners,  mostly  from  the  North, 
was  asking  for  admission  into  the  Union, 
and  the  population  of  Oregon  had  'become 
sufficient  to  entitle  it  to  territorial  govern- 
ment. Texas  was  putting  forth  claims  to 
part  of  the  ceded  territory,  and  the  ques- 
tion whether  slavery  should  be  recognized 
in  territorial  governments  had  become 
very  acute. 

The  Clayton  Compromise,  brought  for- 
ward in  1848,  proposed  to  leave  the  ques- 
tion of  slavery  in  the  territory  involved  to 
the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court.  The 
Senate  approved  the  compromise,  but  the 
anti-slavery  House  of  Representatives  re- 
jected it.  Finally,  early  in  1850,  Henry 
Clay  brought  forward  his  compromises, 
which,  after  eight  months,  were  enacted 
into  laws,  which  resulted  in  the  admission 
of  California  as  a  free  State ;  the  organiza- 
tion of  Oregon  as  a  Territory  with  slavery 
prohibited ;  the  establishment  of  territorial 
governments  for  Utah  and  New  Mexico 
without  restrictions  as  to  slavery ;  the  area 
of  Texas  reduced,  she  being  paid  $10,000,- 
000  for  the  loss  of  territory;  the  forbid- 
ding of  the  slave  trade  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  and  the  enactment  of  a  strin- 
gent fugitive  slave  law.  Neither  side  was 
fully  satisfied  with  these  compromises  and 
their  adoption  helped  to  seal  the  fate  of 
the  Whig  party. 

Within  two  years  propositions  came  for 
organizing  a  territorial  government  in  the 
country  west  of  Missouri.  These  resulted 
in  an  enabling  act  for  the  Territories  of 
Kansas  and  Nebraska,  which  was  passed 
in  May,  1854.  This  act,  taking  the  Clay 
compromises  as  a  precedent  for  leaving 
the  question  of  slavery  to  the  verdict  of  the 
people  of  the  Territory,  repealed  the  old 
Missouri  Compromise  and  established  the 
principle  of  what  was   by   some  termed 

"popular  sovereignty"  and  by  others 
"squatter  sovereignty."  Strife  between 
the  North  and  the  South  for  the  settlement 
of  Kansas  resulted  in  a  civil  war  in  the 
Territory  and  was  a  potent  factor  in  form- 
ing the  Republican  party,  whose  chief 
tenet  was  that  set  forth  in  the  Freesoil 
convention  which  nominated  Van  Buren 
in  1848,  namely,  that  there  must  be  no 
slave  Territories  and  no  more  slave  States. 

Finally,  to  cap  the  climax  of  causes  for 
irritation  at  the  North,  came  the  "Dred 
Scott  Decision,"  delivered  by  Chief  Justice 
Taney,  of  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  year  1856. 
Dred  Scott  was  a  negro,  who  had  been 
taken  as  a  slave  to  Fort  Snelling,  in  the 
Louisiana  Territory,  held  there  for  several 
years,  and  had  there  married  his  wife, 
brought  there  in  the  same  manner.  They 
were  then  taken  to  Missouri  and  held  as 
slaves,  two  children  being  born  to  them. 
In  1854  Dred  Scott  brought  suit  for  the 
freedom  of  himself  and  family,  basing  his 
claim  on  the  fact  that  they  were  unlaw- 
fully held  in  servitude  at  Fort  Snelling  be- 
cause of  the  prohibitive  clause  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise.  The  suit  passed 
through  three  inferior  courts  and  reached 
the  Supreme  Court  in  December,  1855.  It 
was  reargued  the  next  spring,  but  the  de- 
cision was  deferred  until  after  the  Presi- 
dential election  of  1856.  The  decision, 
concurred  in  by  six  of  the  eight  justices 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  was  accompanied 
by  an  elaborate  opinion  from  the  Chief 
Justice.  It  held  that  two  questions  were 
involved  : 

First,  was  Dred  Scott,  even  if  free,  be- 
ing a  descendant  of  Africans  imported  as 
slaves,  a  citizen  of  the  United  States, 
competent  to  bring  suit  in  the  courts? 
This  question  the  court  decided  in  the 
negative,  and  the  Chief  Justice,  in  his 
opinion,  declared  that  at  the  time  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  was  adopted,  and  for  a 
hundred  years  before,  the  practice  of  all 
civilized  nations  was  based  on  the  theory 
that  the  negroes  were  an  inferior  race  fit 




only  for  bondage,  and  that  "the  black  man 
had  no  rights  which  the  white  man  was 
bound  to  respect." 

The  second  question  was  whether  the 
section  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  for- 
bidding slaveiy  in  the  Louisiana  Territory, 
on  which  was  based  the  claim  for  freedom, 
was  constitutional.  This  question  also  was 
answered  in  the  negative,  and  Dred  Scott's 
claim  to  freedom  was  denied.  Moreover, 
the  six  justices  declared  that  Congress  had 
no  power  to  exclude  slavery  from  any 
Territory  of  the  United  States.  It  is 
worthy  of  note  that  this  declaration  is  di- 
rectly opposed  to  the  opinion  expressed  by 
Samuel  J.  Tilden,  "That  Congress  has  no 
power  to  establish  or  permit  slavery  in  the 

By  a  singular  coincidence  of  circum- 
stances this  "Dred  Scott  Decision"  was 
made  absolutely  nugatory.  Before  it  was 
rendered  the  negro  family  had  been  pur- 
chased by  an  anti-slavery  man  and  made 
free;  also,  in  1854,  the  Missouri  Compro- 
mise had  been  repealed.  The  decision, 
however,  had  a  powerful  effect  upon  the 
fate  of  slavery.  It  furnished  the  text  for 
animated  and  earnest  discussion  through- 
out the  North,  particularly  exemplified  in 
the  debate  between  Lincoln  and  Douglas  in 
the  Illinois  Senatorial  campaign  of  1858. 
This  discussion  rallied  the  North  to  the 
support  of  the  doctrine  promulgated  by 
the  Freesoil  Democratic  Convention  in 
1848,  which  was  now  embodied  in  the 
rallying  cry  of  the  new  Republican  party 
— "No  more  slave  States;  no  slave  Terri- 

As  a  result  of  fifty  years  of  discussion, 
controversy  and  compromises,  public 
sentiment  had  finally  become  divided  along 
these  lines:  (1)  Recognition  of  slavery  in 
the  States  where  it  legally  existed,  but 
denial  of  the  right  to  take  slaves  into  the 
Territories  and  a  demand  that  no  more 
slave  States  be  admitted  into  the  Union. 
(2)  Slavery  being  a  recognized  institution, 
the  question  of  its  introduction  to  be  left 
to  the  people  of  the  organized  Territories. 

(3)  Slaves  being  recognized  as  property, 
the  slave  owner  to  be  protected  in  taking 
his  slaves  where  he  should  choose.  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  final  decision  was  made 
without  reference  to  any  of  these  views. 
Slavery  was  wiped  out  of  existence  as  a 
result  of  the  unreasonableness  and  arro- 
gance of  the  slave  power. 

The  election  of  Abraham  Lincoln  to  the 
Presidency  in  1860  was  followed  by  the 
great  Civil  War  between  the  pro-slavery 
and  the  anti-slavery  States.  This  war 
finally  solved  the  two  great  problems 
which  had  confronted  the  founders  of  the 
Nation.  The  authority  of  the  general 
Government  was  made  supreme  and  the 
right  of  secession  denied.  Slavery  was 
abolished,  first,  partially  as  a  war  meas- 
ure, and,  finally  and  completely,  according 
to  Washington's  plan,  "through  legislative 
action"  in  the  organic  law  of  the  Nation 
by  the  adoption  of  the  thirteenth  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution. 

In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to 
recall  the  origin  of  slavery,  and  particular- 
ly its  establishment  in  this  country. 
Slavery  is  doubtless  as  old  as  society.  It 
is  founded  upon  the  law  of  force — that  the 
weaker  must  submit  to  the  stronger. 
Justinian,  in  his  Institutes,  refers  its  ori- 
gin to  three  sources,  viz.,  captivity  in  war, 
purchase  of  the  individual  for  a  price  paid 
himself,  and  birth  from  a  slave  mother. 
African  slavery  is  traceable  to  the  first 
and  third  of  these  sources. 

Slavery  was  introduced  into  this  coun- 
try by  the  sale  of  twenty  negroes  in  Vir- 
ginia from  a  Dutch  man-of-war  in  Au- 
gust, 1620.  So  little  favor  did  it  find  that 
at  the  end  of  fifty  years  there  were  scarce- 
ly 2,000  slaves  in  the  colony.  In  1699  the 
General  Assembly  passed  the  first  of  a 
succession  of  acts — twenty-three  in  all — 
prohibiting  the  importation  of  negro 
slaves;  but  every  one  of  these  acts  was 
vetoed  by  the  royal  Governors,  and  one  of 
the  complaints  against  the  King  of  Great 
Britain  by  the  colonists  was  that  he  had 
prevented  the  people  of  this  country  from 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY—  1816-191 

putting  a  stop  to  the  injurious  traffic.  It 
is  noteworthy,  too.  that  one  of  the  earhest 
acts  of  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia, 
after  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
was  to  pass  a  law  prohibiting  the  importa- 
tion of  slaves  into  the  State.  This  was,  as 
a  matter  of  history,  the  first  legislation  in 
the  civilized  world  "setting  the  seal  of 
reprobation  upon  that  opprobrium  of  mod- 
ern civilization,"  the  African  slave  trade. 

It    occurred    nearly    thirty    years    before 
Great  Britain  took  like  action. 

Thus  it  is  seen  that  the  introduction  and 
maintenance  of  slavery  in  the  colonies  was 
against  the  wishes  and  in  spite  of  the  op- 
position of  the  colonists.  It  was  due  to  the 
avarice  of  British  slave  traders  and  of 
owners  of  British  slave  ships,  and  was 
akin  to  the  similar  selfish  policy  which  led 
England  to  make  the  new  world  the  dump- 
ing ground  for  her  criminals. 

[Chapter  XXIII. ] 



mN  the  year  1854  the  Democracy 
of  Indiana  held  its  State  Con- 
vention in  the  balmy  month  of 
May   (on  the  24th).      The    at- 
tendance,  as  usual,  was  large. 

On  motion  of  J.  W.  Borden, 
Lieutenant-Governor  Ashbel  P. 
Willard  was  made  temporary  chairman. 
Upon  taking  the  chair,  he  delivered  a 
characteristic  speech — one  that  thrilled 
the  great  convention  and  aroused  un- 
bounded enthusiasm. 

The  honor  of  officiating  as  permanent 
presiding  officer  was  conferred  upon  Sen- 
ator Jesse  D.  Bright.  The  hearty  greeting 
accorded  him  upon  being  presented  to  the 
convention  bore  eloquent  testimony  to  the 
esteem  in  which  he  was  held  by  his  polit- 
ical associates. 

As  Vice-Presidents,  these  gentlemen 
were  named:  Richard  Raleigh,  Elisha  G. 
English,  John  L.  Spann,  A.  C.  Pepper, 
James  Osborn,  J.  M.  Gregg,  John  S.  Davis, 
Jacob  Walker,  A.  L.  Wheeler,  J.  C.  Van 
Olman  and  Mr.  Johnson. 

Secretaries — James  Bradley  and  C.  B. 


For  Secretary  of  State,  Nehemiah  Hay- 
den,  of  Rush  county,  received  413  votes, 
to  60  for  Wm.  R.  Bowes,  of  Laporte. 

For  Auditor  of  State,  John  P.  Dunn,  of 
Perry  county,  was  nominated  by  395  votes, 
to  74  for  Joseph  J.  Bingham,  of  Lafayette. 

On  motion  of  B.  R.  Edmonston,  Elijah 
Newland,  of  Washington  county,  was  by 
acclamation  renominated  for  State  Treas- 

On  motion  of  General  James  R.  Slack, 
of  Huntington,  William  C.  Larrabee  was 
in  like  manner  renominated  for  Superin- 
tendent of  Public  Instruction. 

For  Supreme  Judge,  Fourth  district, 
Alvin  P.  Hovey,  of  Posey  county,  was 
nominated  over  James  M.  Hanna,  of  Sulli- 
van, by  a  vote  of  272  to  113. 


1.  B.  R.  Edmonston,  Dubois  County. 

2.  James  S.  Athon,  Clark. 

3.  Samuel  H.  Buskii-k,  Monroe. 

4.  A.  C.  Pepper,  Ohio. 

5.  N.  H.  Raymond,  Wayne. 

6.  William  J.  Brown,  Marion. 

7.  William  E.  McLean,  Vigo. 

8.  Joseph  J.   Bingham,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  Samuel  A.  Hall,  Cass. 

10.  James  Sinclair,  Allen. 

11.  S.  L.  Rugg,  Adams. 


After  the  stunning  defeat  in  1840,  the 
Democrats  of  Indiana  enjoyed  an  uninter- 
rupted succession  of  victories,  beginning 
with  the  triumphant  election  of  James 
Whitcomb  to  the  Governorship,  in  1843. 
Every  State  election  held  thereafter  sig- 
nalized a  Democratic  victory.  P^our 
gubernatorial  elections  resulted  in  the 
choice  of  Democrats — in  placing  at  the 
head  of  the  State  government  such  faith- 
ful and  efficient  public  servants  as  James 
Whitcomb  and  Joseph  A.  Wright,  both 
elected  to  two  successive  terms.  Notwith- 
standing the  conceded  excellence  of  their 
administrations,  conditions  arose  that,  at 
the  time,  were  susceptible  of  being 
thoughtlessly  construed  to  mean  a  vote  of 
censure,  but  which  in  calmer  moment  was 
pronounced  one  of  those  strange  mani- 
festations which  Mr.  Lincoln  mildly  and 
considerately  termed  "wobbling." 

A  combination  of  circumstances  led  to 
the  popular  verdict  of  1854.  The  repeal 
of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  brought 
about  largely  through  the  efforts  of 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  in  the  almost  desper- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

ate  hope  and  expectation  of  calming  the 
rising  storm  of  slavery  and  anti-slavery 
agitation ;  a  renewal  of  the  intensely  bitter 
fight  against  the  liquor  traffic;  the  rapid 
spread  of  that  political  eruption  known  as 
Know-Nothingism,  and  a  liberal  sprinkling 
of  indefinable  discontent — all  these  irrita- 
tions on  the  body  politic  contributed  to 
the  remarkable  upheaval  that  led  to  what 
in  efi'ect  amounted  to  a  recantation  of  the 
verdict  of  1852. 

Edward  E.  Moore  speaks  thus  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  Fusion  movement 
accomplished  its  purpose  for  the  time  be- 

"Governor  Wright's  administration  was 
signalized  by  a  great  agitation.  Several 
local  and  special  acts  dealing  with  the 
liquor  traffic  were  passed  by  the  Legisla- 
ture of  1850,  and  in  1853  a  general  law, 
with  local  option  features,  was  enacted. 
This  latter  fell  under  the  condemnation  of 
the  courts  on  grounds  of  unconstitution- 
ality, and  the  people,  already  impatient 
because  of  the  evils  of  the  traffic,  seemed 
especially  provoked  at  the  result.  So  in 
1854,  rallying  all  the  temperance  forces  of 
the  State,  and  uniting  all  elements  of  op- 
position to  the  Democratic  party,  which  at 
its  convention  had  declared  against  tem- 
perance legislation,  the  temperance  people 
succeeded  in  electing  a  full  State  and  legis- 
lative ticket  on  a  prohibition  platform. 
The  enthusiasm  was  tremendous.  And 
when  the  Legislature  met  in  1855  it  pro- 
ceeded to  pass  a  State-wide  prohibition 
law,  and  the  Governor,  though  a  Demo- 
crat, signed  it.  But  before  the  task  of 
putting  it  in  operation  had  proceeded  very 
far  this  law  also  was  declared  unconstitu- 
tional by  the  Supreme  Court. 

"Largely  because  of  the  overshadowing 
importance  now  assumed  by  the  slavery 
question  the  temperance  agitation  grad- 
ually subsided,  but  it  never  entirely  ceased. 
Through  spasmodic  movements  of  differ- 
ent kinds  and  the  continuous  efforts  of 
temperance  societies  and  parties,  the  agi- 
tation has  been  kept  continually  before  the 
people  for  more  than  a  hundred  years.  It 
began  before  the  days  of  Statehood.  The 
evils  of  intemperance  were  especially 
marked  in  its  influence  upon  the  Indians. 
They  would  barter  anything  they  pos- 
sessed for  the  white   man's    'fire   water,' 

and  it  not  only  affected  their  temper,  mak- 
ing them  troublesome  and  dangerous  to 
deal  with,  but  destroyed  them  physically. 
Stronger  temperance  documents  than  the 
messages  and  State  papers  of  some  of  the 
early  Governors  would  be  hard  to  find." 

The  Fusion  convention  was  held  Thurs- 
day, July  13,  at  Washington  Hall,  Indiana- 
polis. Thomas  Smith,  of  Ripley,  a  former 
Democratic  member  of  Congress  from  the 
Fourth  district,  had  been  selected  for 
president  of  the  convention  at  a  prelim- 
inary meeting,  held  the  night  before, 
presided  over  by  Jacob  P.  Chapman,  with 
John  L.  King,  of  Madison,  as  secretary. 

Smith  was  a  pronounced  opponent  of 
slavery  extension.  Associated  with  him 
were  a  number  of  other  hitherto  prom- 
inent Democrats,  among  them  Oliver  P. 
Morton,  Dr.  E.  W.  H.  Ellis,  Dan  Mace,  M. 
C.  Garber,  H.  L.  Ellsworth,  ex-commis- 
sioner of  patents,  Capt.  John  A.  Hendricks 
and  others  of  that  type.  Most  of  these 
men  subsequently  became  permanently 
identified  with  the  newly  organized  Re- 
publican party. 

In  taking  the  chair.  President  Smith 
commented  on  the  causes  which  had  called 
together  so  vast  a  concourse  of  people. 
"It  was,"  he  said,  "the  uprising  of  the 
masses  determined  to  pursue  the  dictates 
of  their  own  sense  of  right  rather  than 
the  behests  of  party  leaders."  He  had  been 
a  Democrat  all  his  life  and  was  no  less  a 
Democrat  now.  No  man  had  a  right  to 
say  that  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Com- 
promise was  a  Democratic  measure  so  far 
as  the  sentiments  of  the  majority  of  the 
Democrats  in  the  free  States  were  con- 
cerned. They  were  opposed  to  it;  it  had 
never  been  submitted  to  them;  they  had 
not  and  would  not  give  their  sanction  to 
it.  Forty-three  of  the  Democratic  mem- 
bers of  Congress  out  of  the  eighty-nine 
members  from  the  free  States  had  voted 
for  it.  What  right  had  any  party  to  say 
it  was  approved  by  the  majority  of  the 
Democrats  from  the  free  States? 

Col.  Smith,  in  the  course  of  his  address. 



spoke  approvingly  of  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  and  its  influence  on  the  great  North- 
west. Rev.  George  B.  Jocelyn,  a  Meth- 
odist minister,  made  his  first  political 
speech  on  this  occasion,  while  Hon.  H.  L. 
Ellsworth  and  Capt.  John  A.  Hendricks, 
both  of  whom  had  taken  part  in  the  re- 
cently held  Democratic  convention, 
repudiated  the  platform  adopted  at  that 

The  official  vote,  as  cast  in  the  election 
of  1854,  was : 

E.  B.  Collins,  Dearborn,  Fusion.  .  .98,259     12,623 
Nehemiah  Hayden,  Democrat 85,636 

Hiram  E.  Talbot,  Putnam,  Fusion.  .91,812       5,604 
John  P.  Dunn,  Democrat 86,208 


W.  R.  Noffsinger,  Parke,  Fusion.  .97,726  12,134 
Elijah   Newland,  Democrat 85,592 

Samuel  B.  Gookins,  Vigo,  Fusion. .  .96,386     11,029 
Alvin  P.  Hovey,  Democrat 85,357 


Caleb  Mills,  Fusion 99,857     14,022 

William  C.  Larrabee,  Democrat 85,835 

Noffsinger  received  23,367  votes  on  bal- 
lots bearing  an  incorrect  initial.  A  bitter 
controversy  arose  over  reputed  efforts  to 
prevent  his  taking  the  office,  but  the  Gov- 
ernor issued  to  him  the  commission  with- 
out compelling  legal  action. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  Alvin  P. 
Hovey,  at  the  time  of  his  nomination  for 
Supreme  Judge,  was  a  member  of  the 
Supreme  Court  by  appointment  of  Gov- 
ernor Wright.  Addison  L.  Roache 
resigned  from  that  body  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Hovey,  who  entered  upon  duty 
May  8,  1854.  The  Democratic  State  Con- 
vention, which  met  on  the  24th  day  of  the 
same  month,  nominated  Hovey  for  that 
position.  At  the  general  election  that 
year,  October  10,  Samuel  B.  Gookins, 
nominee   of   the    Fusionists,    was   elected 

EMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

over  Hovey  and  served  until  1857,  when 
he  was  succeeded  by  James  L.  Worden. 

Addison  L.  Roache  resigned  from  the 
Supreme  Court  bench  May  8,  1854.  Alvin 
P.  Hovey  was  appointed  his  successor. 
At  the  next  genei-al  election,  held  October 
10,  Hovey.  who  had  been  given  the  Demo- 
cratic nomination,  failed  of  election  with 
the  rest  of  the  Democratic  ticket. 


Not  only  did  the  Fusionists  elect  their 
entire  State  ticket  and  a  majority  of  the 
General  Assembly,  but  they  also  succeeded 
in  electing  nine  of  the  eleven  members  of 
Congress.  Only  two  of  the  eleven  Demo- 
cratic Congressional  nominees  escaped 
defeat.  These  were  Smith  Miller,  in  the 
First,  and  Wm.  H.  English,  in  the  Second 
district.  In  the  Lafayette  district  the 
Fusionists  bodily  captured  Dan  Mace, 
whom  the  Democrats  had  three  times  sent 
to  Congress,  and  made  him  the  Fusion 
nominee — and  elected  him  with  a  major- 
ity of  2,519.  Among  the  Democratic 
Congressional  candidates  who  went  down 
in  defeat  were  Thomas  A.  Hendricks,  in 
the  Sixth  district,  beaten  by  478  votes, 
and  Wm.  S.  Holman,  in  the  Fourth,  de- 
feated by  Will  Cumback.  Only  two  of  the 
nine  districts  that  sent  Democrats  to 
Congress  in  1852  stood  firm.  These  were 
the  First  and  the  Second,  re-electing  Smith 
Miller  by  813  and  William  H.  English  by 
586.  Two  of  the  eleven — English  and 
Cumback — were  natives  of  Indiana.  The 
delegation  was  made  up  of  these  gentle- 

1.  Smith  Miller,  Patoka. 

2.  William  H.  English,   Lexington. 

3.  George  G.  Dunn,  Bedford. 

4.  William  Cumback,  Greensburg. 

5.  David   P.  Holloway,  Richmond. 

6.  Lucien  Barbour,  Indianapolis. 

7.  Harvey  D.  Scott,  Terre  Haute. 

8.  Daniel  Mace,  Lafayette. 

9.  Schuyler  Colfax,  South  Bend. 

10.  Samuel  Brenton,  Fort  Wayne. 

11.  John  U.  Pettit, 


-19  16 

With  a  view  to  enabling  the  discerning 
reader  to  gain  a  fair  understanding  of 
what  was  involved  in  this  contest  and 
brought  about  such  drastic  results,  the 
platforms  of  the  opposing  parties  are 
herewith  reproduced  in  their  entirety: 


"Resolved,  That  the  Democrats  of  In- 
diana fully  approve  of  the  principles  of 
the  act  extending  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  over  and  organizing  the  Territories 
of  Nebraska  and  Kansas. 

"2.  Resolved,  That  we  concur  in  the 
opinion  that  it  is  not  properly  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  Congress  to  determine  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution  of  a  State, 
further  than  to  require  that  it  be  a  re- 
publican form,  but  on  the  contrary,  that 
the  people  do  possess  the  right  and  power 
to  adopt  such  form  of  government  as  they 
may  deem  best  suited  to  their  views  and 
wants,  and  that  this  right  shall  be  recog- 
nized as  one  of  the  fundamental  principles 
of  self-government. 

"3.  Resolved,  That  this  convention  is 
distinctly  opposed  to  that  provision  of  the 
Nebraska  and  Kansas  bill  commonly 
known  as  the  Clayton  amendment,  which 
made  a  distinction  between  native  born 
and  foreign  inhabitants,  who  may  be  resi- 
dents of  the  Territories,  and  feel  gratified 
that  the  efforts  of  the  democracy  have  been 
successful  in  expunging  that  odious  fea- 
ture from  the  act. 

"4.  Resolved,  That  intemperance  is  a 
great  moral  and  social  evil,  for  the  re- 
straint and  correction  of  which  legislative 
interposition  is  necessary  and  proper,  but 
that  we  can  not  approve  of  any  plan  for 
the  eradication  or  correction  of  this  evil 
that  must  necessarily  result  in  the  inflic- 
tion of  greater  ones,  and  that  we  are  there- 
fore opposed  to  any  law  upon  this  subject 
that  will  authorize  the  searching  for  or 
seizure,  confiscation  and  destruction  of 
private  property. 

"5.  Resolved,  That  we  regard  all  polit- 
ical organizations,  based  upon  the  single 
idea  of  temperance  reform,  as  dangerous 
to  the  perpetuity  of  our  republican  form 
of  government  by  withdrawing  the  atten- 
tion of  the  people  from  the  great  political 
principles  upon  which  it  is  founded,  and 

that  we  most  earnestly  appeal  to  our  fellow 
Democrats  throughout  the  State  to  adhere, 
in  the  selection  of  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, to  the  practice  of  choosing  such  men 
as  will  make  these  great  principles  of 
Democratic  policy,  under  the  influence  of 
which  this  country  has  been  brought  to  its 
present  elevated  and  prosperous  condition, 
paramount  to  all  other  considerations. 

"6.  Resolved,  That  we  have  full  faith 
and  confidence  in  the  wisdom,  patriotism 
and  ability  of  Franklin  Pierce,  President 
of  the  United  States,  and  that  we  fully 
approve  of  the  principles  laid  down  in  his 
inaugural  message  and  his  message  to 
Congress,  and  that  we  most  truly  and 
cordially  endorse  the  general  policy  of  his 
administration  as  carried  out  in  conform- 
ity with  the  principles  laid  down  in  said 

"7.  Resolved,  That  Judge  Douglas,  of 
the  United  States  Senate,  is  entitled  to 
and  receives  our  hearty  thanks  for  so  ably 
advocating  the  principles  of  non-interven- 
tion, as  contained  in  the  Kansas  and  Ne- 
braska bill,  and  that  we  cordially  endorse 
the  action  of  our  Senators  and  Repre- 
sentatives in  sustaining  the  same. 

"8.  Resolved,  That  the  Democracy  of 
Indiana,  still  adhering  to  the  Constitution 
of  the  Confederacy,  openly  and  avowedly 
condemns  any  organization,  secret  or 
otherwise,  that  would  aim  to  disrobe  any 
citizen,  native  or  adopted,  of  his  political, 
civil  or  religious  liberty." 


"Whereas,  We,  the  freemen  of  Indiana, 
without  respect  to  party,  and  actuated  by 
a  common  devotion  to  our  Republic,  and  a 
common  reverence  for  its  founders,  have 
assembled  ourselves  together  in  commem- 
oration of  the  passage  of  the  ordinance 
of  July  13th,  1787,  consecrating  the  North- 
west Territory  to  freedom;  and, 

"Whereas,  The  unanimous  adoption  of 
said  ordinance  by  the  Representatives  of 
all  the  States  in  the  Union  at  that  date 
clearly  evinces  that  opposition  to  the 
extension  of  slavery,  to  the  extent  of  con- 
stitutional power,  was  the  fixed  policy  of 
our  fathers ;  and, 

"Whereas,  We  regard  the  recent  repeal 
of  the  eighth  section  of  the  'Missouri  Com- 
promise' as  a  gross  and  wanton  violation 
of  the  faith  of  the  Union,  plighted  to  a 
solemn  compact,  restricting  the  extension 
of  slavery;  therefore. 


"Resolved,  That  we  are  uncompromis- 
ingly opposed  to  the  extension  of  slavery ; 
and  further,  that  we  utterly  deprecate  and 
repudiate  the  platform  of  principles 
adopted  by  the  self-styled  Democratic 
convention  on  the  24th  day  of  May,  last, 
endorsing-  and  approving  the  Kansas-Ne- 
braska iniquity. 

"Resolved,  That  we  will  waive  all  for- 
mer party  predilections,  and,  in  concert, 
by  all  lawful  means,  seek  to  place  every 
branch  of  the  Federal  Government  in  the 
hands  of  men  who  will  assert  the  rights  of 
freedom,  restore  the  Missouri  Compro- 
mise and  refuse,  under  all  circumstances, 
to  tolerate  the  extension  of  slavery  into 
Territories  secured  to  freedom  by  that 

"Resolved,  That  we  regard  intemper- 
ance as  a  great  political,  moral  and  social 
evil — a  legitimate  subject  of  legislation — 
and  that  we  are  in  favor  of  the  passage  of 
a  judicious,  constitutional  and  efficient 
prohibitory  law  with  such  penalties  as 
shall  effectually  suppress  the  traffic  in  in- 
toxicating liquors  as  a  beverage. 

"Resolved,  That  we  utterly  condemn  the 
abusive  attacks  which  have  recently  been 
made  from  various  quarters  on  the  prot- 
estant  ministry  of  the  country.  We 
cherish  with  gratitude  and  pleasure  the 
memory  of  their  patriotic  zeal  in  the 
Revolutionary  struggle,  and  we  recognize 
in  the  ministry  of  the  country  the  worthy 
sons  of  such  illustrious  sires." 

The  anti-liquor  movement  began  during 
the  forties.  It  had  assumed  formidable 
proportions  in  1848  and  culminated  in  the 
election  of  a  Legislature  that  had  the  dis- 
position to  deal  drastically  with  the  evil 
of  intemperance.  Several  causes  con- 
tributed to  the  creation  of  a  pronounced 
sentiment  in  opposition  to  the  liquor 
traffic.  Quite  a  number  of  men  high  in 
office  were  notoriously  intemperate  in 
their  habits.  Some  of  them,  otherwise 
held  in  high  esteem,  were  retired  to  pri- 
vate life  on  account  of  their  fondness  for 
liquor.  A  man  of  extraordinary  orator- 
ical powers,  chosen  to  represent  Indiana 
in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  shot 
his  brother-in-law  while  both  were  in  a 
state  of  intoxication.  Malaria  was  quite 
common    in    Indiana,    and    the    popular 

remedy  was  quinine  and  whisky.  In  agri- 
cultural pursuits  whisky  was  considered 
an  indispensable  adjunct  to  harvesting. 
Snake  bites  were  of  frequent  infliction, 
and  whisky  was  the  popular  antidote.  A 
"bracer"  before  breakfast  was  regarded 
an  absolute  necessity  in  many  households. 
There  were  no  internal  revenue  laws  in 
those  days,  and  a  country  store  without 
whisky  for  sale  was  indeed  a  rarity.  All 
these  usages  and  practices  had  their  effect. 
Popular  education  was  too  slow  a  process 
to  lessen  the  evils  of  intemperance,  so  the 
conclusion  was  reached  that  the  right 
course  to  pursue  in  the  premises  was  to 
legislate.  This  was  done.  For  the  same 
reasons  that  Governor  Thomas  A.  Hen- 
dricks approved  the  dra.stic  Baxter  law  of 
1873,  Governor  Joseph  A.  Wright  signed 
the  temperance  legislation  that  came  to 
him  for  approval  or  rejection  during  his 
second  term  of  office.  But  the  Supreme 
Court,  elected  by  the  people  in  1852,  made 
short  work  of  this  sort  of  legislation  by 
declaring  it  to  be  unconstitutional  in  its 
main  provisions.  The  grounds  upon  which 
this  was  done  is  briefly  yet  comprehensive- 
ly set  forth  in  this  epitome,  carefully 
formulated  by  the  Hon.  James  E.  McCul- 
lough.  Assistant  Attorney-General : 


"The  local  option  law  was  an  enactment 
of  March  4,  1853,  and  the  prohibition  law 
was  approved  February  16,  1855.  The 
said  local  option  law  provided  for  taking  a 
vote  by  townships  annually  at  the  April 
election  on  the  license  question,  and  that 
without  the  consent  of  a  majority  of  the 
legal  voters  of  the  proper  township  'for 
license,'  none  could  issue.  In  connection 
with  the  affirmative  vote  a  bond  was  also 
required  by  the  applicant  for  license.  So 
much  of  this  act  as  made  the  issuing  of  a 
license  depend  upon  the  favorable  vote  of 
the  township  was  held  unconstitutional  in 
Maize  vs.  The  State,  4  Ind.  342.  The  de- 
cision of  the  court  was  based  on  the 
ground  that  the  legislation  was  obnoxious 
to  the  sections  of  the  constitution,  which 
respectively  provide  as  follows : 



NDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

Section  25,  Article  1:  No  law  shall  be  passed, 
the  taking  effect  of  which  shall  be  made  to  de- 
pend upon  any  authority,  except  as  provided  in 
this  constitution. 

Section  26,  Article  1:  The  operation  of  the 
laws  shall  never  be  suspended,  except  by  author- 
ity of  the  general  assembly. 

Section  22,  Article  4:  Local  laws  for  the  pun- 
ishment of  offenders  and  for  the  regulation  of 
county  and  township  business,  are  expressly  for- 

Section  23,  Article  4:  Whenever  a  general  law 
can  be  made  applicable  all  laws  shall  be  general 
and  of  uniform  operation  throughout  the  State. 

"The  holding  of  the  court,  in  substance, 
was  that  so  much  of  the  legislation  as 
made  the  legality  of  a  license  in  a  town- 
ship depend  upon  the  vote  of  the  people 
was  to  make  the  taking  effect  of  the  law 
depend  upon  that  vote,  which,  under  the 
constitution,  the  Legislature  was  unau- 
thorized to  do.  The  court  further  says: 
'If  we  regard  the  act  of  March,  1853,  in 
force  from  its  passage,  as  is  claimed  in 
argument,  then  we  conceive  it  to  be  in 
conflict  with  Section  26  of  Article  1.  That 
section  reads :  "The  operation  of  the  laws 
shall  never  be  suspended  except  by  au- 
thority of  the  General  Assembly."  '  As 
already  indicated,  the  court  also  holds  the 
act  is  in  violation  of  the  local  law  clause 
of  the  constitution  above  quoted. 

"In  the  case  cited,  while  the  court  holds 
that  the  local  option  feature  of  the  legisla- 
tion is  void,  it  holds  that  the  statute  may 
nevertheless  stand  as  a  license  law  with 
the  local  option  feature  eliminated.  How- 
ever, in  the  case  of  Meshmeier  vs.  The 
State,  11  Ind.  483,  the  court  overruled  so 
much  of  the  former  decision  as  held  that 
any  of  the  act  in  question  was  valid,  and 
held  that  the  whole  act  fell  in  consequence 
of  the  local  option  feature  being  so  con- 
nected with  the  other  provisions  of  the 
act,  as  that  a  part  could  not  be  held  valid 
and  a  part  invalid. 

"The  prohibitory  law  of  1855  was  held 
void  in  Beebe  vs.  The  State,  6  Ind.  501.  The 
decision  in  this  case  may  be  said  to  be 
based  upon  the  ground  that  the  legislation 
in  question  is  iiltra  vires  the  Legislature 
of  the  State  under  the  constitution  thereof. 
The  court  says,  on  page  510:  'The  first 
section  of  the  first  article  (of  the  consti- 
tution) declares  that  all  men  are  endowed 
by  their  creator  with  certain  inalienable 
rights ;  that  among  these  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  Under  our 
constitution,  then,  we  have  some  rights 
that  have  not  been  surrendered,  which  are 
consequently  reserved  and  which  govern- 
ment cannot  deprive  us  of  unless  we  shall 
first  forfeit  them  by  our  crimes.'  Several 
sections  of  the  constitution  are  quoted  by 
the  court  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that 
the  legislative  power  of  the  State  under 
the  constitution  is  not  at  all  unlimited. 
For  instance,  the  section  providing  that 
'the  privilege  of  the  debtor  to  enjoy  the 
necessary  comforts  of  life  shall  be  recog- 
nized by  wholesome  laws;'  the  section 
against  'passing  a  law  impairing  the  obli- 
gation of  contracts;'  the  section  against 
'any  law  restraining  the  free  interchange 
of  thought  and  opinion,'  etc. 

"These  sections  were  quoted  by  the 
court  in  support  of  its  position  to  the 
effect  that  the  Legislature  had  by  no  means 
been  given  unlimited  power  over  the  un- 
alienable rights  of  citizens  or  others  within 
the  State,  and  it  is  held  that  among  these 
rights  is  that  of  acquiring  property,  sell- 
ing or  disposing  of  the  same  and  using 
the  same,  and  that  intoxicating  liquors  are 
property,  and  were  so  regarded  at  the 
adoption  of  the  constitution,  and  hence  the 
right  to  manufacture,  sell  or  use  the  same 
is  one  of  the  rights  not  taken  away  by 
the  constitution,  nor  is  power  given  to  the 
Legislature  to  take  the  same  away." 

[Chapter  XXIV.] 



URING  the  early  fifties  a  new 
party  sprang  up  to  hinder  and 
harass  the  progress  of  national 
understanding  and  to  defer  the 
solution  of  the  great  problem 
that  threatened  the  security  of 
the  American  Government. 
Party  strife,  resulting  from  violent  con- 
tentions over  State  rights  and  abolition, 
could  not  fail  but  produce  political  move- 
ments inimical  to  sane  reasoning  and 
humane  thinking.  A  mistaken  sense  of 
patriotism,  a  gross  misconception  of  the 
requisites  of  true  American  citizenship, 
produced  in  these  troublous  times  a  pe- 
culiar organization  known  as  the  Know- 
Nothing  party.  As  its  name  implies,  it 
fostered  sentiments,  narrow  and  provin- 
cial, hostile  to  every  internal  instinct,  and 
incompatible  with  the  spirit  of  political 
freedom  that  characterized  the  founders 
of  the  great  American  Republic.  It  was 
directed  first  and  essentially  against 
Catholic  influence,  or  Romanism,  as  this 
alleged  danger  was  called.  Its  organiza- 
tion was  founded  on  secrecy,  luring  the 
ready  followers  of  formalism,  such  as  en- 
joy connection  with  societies  whose  chief 
charm  lies  in  rituals,  oaths  and  vows  of 
a  more  or  less  doubtful  meaning. 

Later  the  Know-KTothings  turned  their 
eff'orts  more  directly  against  the  foreign- 
born  element  of  our  population.  It  is  but 
just  to  acknowledge  that  many  a  sincere 
man  was  attracted  into  this  circle  of  agi- 
tators who  posed  as  the  friends  of  liberty, 
and  incidentally  as  the  champions  of  the 
Southern  slave.  Then,  too,  not  a  few  of 
the  anti-slavery  men  supported  the  Know- 
Nothings  in  the  hope  of  hastening  the 
dissolution  of  the  old  Whig  party  and 
winning  support  for  the  Republican  party. 

which  a  few  years  later  was  preparing  to 
assume  control  of  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment. The  name  of  the  Know-Nothing 
party  had  gradually  given  way  to  that  of 
the  American  party.  The  organization 
continued  to  flourish  under  this  more 
euphonious  appellation  without  having 
changed  any  of  its  original  tenets.  Vari- 
ous demonstrations  of  ill-will  the 
foreigners,  as  well  as  a  number  of  bloody 
assaults  made  on  inoftensive  people, 
aroused  strong  resentment  in  certain 
quarters  against  smug  defenders  of 
their  self-interpreted  Americanism. 

The  fact  that  foreigners  sought  protec- 
tion within  the  fold  of  the  Democratic 
party,  by  whom  they  were  cordially  re- 
ceived, began  to  arouse  the  opponents  to 
slavery  and  the  adherents  of  the  Repub- 
lican party  to  the  danger  that  threatened 
their  own  political  security.  This  unwar- 
ranted outburst  of  nativism  had  to  be  com- 
bated by  some  dignified  expression  of  dis- 
approval from  a  respectable  source.  One 
of  the  Republican  leaders,  Henry  Wilson, 
United  States  Senator  from  Mas.sachu- 
setts,  at  one  time  said  to  have  belonged  to 
the  now  oflfensive  party,  turned  his  whole 
energy  to  defeat  a  measure,  submitted  by 
his  own  Legislature  to  a  vote  of  the  people, 
which  provided  that  no  foreigner  should 
have  the  right  to  vote  until  he  had  been 
for  two  years  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States.  He  and  Edward  L.  Pierce,  later 
the  biographer  of  Charles  Sumner,  invited 
Carl  Schurz,  the  great  representative  of 
adopted  citizen.ship,  to  attend  a  public  din- 
ner given  at  Boston  on  the  anniversary  of 
Thomas  Jefferson's  birthday.  This  par- 
ticular day  was  chosen  in  harmony  with 
the  rejuvenated  Jefferson  States  Rights 
principle  that  had  been  revived  in  defense 



-19  16 

of  the  new  fugitive  slave  law.  The  real  ob- 
ject of  Mr.  Schurz's  presence  was  to  arouse 
a  demonstration  against  the  nativistic  tide 
and  save  the  State  for  nobler  work.  The 
dinner  was  held  at  the  Parker  House  and 
was  attended  by  the  gentlemen  already 
named  in  this  connection,  as  well  as  by 
John  A.  Andrew,  later  War  Governor  of 
Massachusetts ;  Governor  Boutwell,  Frank 
Bird,  Samuel  Bowles  and  others.  Denun- 
ciations of  the  fugitive  slave  law  and  the 
narrow-minded  spirit  of  nativism  were 
freely  uttered  by  these  champions  of  lib- 
erty and  helped  to  pave  the  way  for  a 
larger  and  more  striking  gathering  that 
took  place  a  few  days  later,  on  April  18, 
1859,  at  Faneuil  Hall. 

Carl  Schurz  was  on  this  evening  the 
speaker  of  honor  and  availed  himself  of 
the  opportunity  to  voice  in  matchless  ora- 
tory the  sentiments  that  made  him  the 
ideal  son  of  a  great  Republic,  born  though 
he  was  on  foreign  soil.  In  his  memoirs 
Mr.  Schurz  apologizes  for  this  wonderful 
outburst  of  feeling  and  excuses  it  on  the 
plea  of  youth  and  the  strength  of  emotions 
as  yet  uncurbed  in  the  consciousness  of  the 
untold  possibilities  of  civil  liberty  in  Amer- 
ica. It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  speech 
may  not  be  reproduced  verbatim,  as  every 
word  breathes  loyalty,  devotion  and  a 
boundless  love  for  the  land  of  his  adop- 

The  first  paragraph  must  suffice  to  in- 
dicate the  spirit : 

"A  few  days  ago  I  stood  on  the  cupola 
of  your  State  House  and  overlooked,  for 
the  first  time,  this  venerable  city  and  the 
country  surrounding  it.  Then  the  streets, 
and  hills,  and  waters  around  me  began  to 
teem  with  the  life  of  historical  recollec- 
tions— recollections  dear  to  all  mankind — 
and  a  feeling  of  pride  arose  in  my  heart, 
and  I  said  to  myself,  'I,  too,  am  an  Ameri- 
can citizen.'  There  was  Bunker  Hill,  and 
Charlestown,  and  Lexington  and  Dorches- 
ter Heights  not  far  off";  there  the  harbor 
into  which  the  British  tea  was  sunk;  there 
the  place  where  the  old  liberty  tree  stood ; 
there  John  Hancock's  house;  there  Ben- 
jamin Franklin's  birthplace.     And  now  I 

stand  in  this  grand  old  hall,  which  has  so 
often  resounded  with  the  noblest  appeals 
that  ever  thrilled  American  hearts,  and 
where  I  am  almost  afraid  to  hear  the  echo 
of  my  ov/n  feeble  voice.  Oh !  no  man  that 
loves  liberty,  wherever  he  may  have  first 
seen  the  light  of  day,  can  fail,  on  this 
sacred  spot,  to  pay  his  tribute  to  Ameri- 
canism. And  here,  with  all  these  glorious 
memories  crowding  upon  my  heart,  I  will 
off"er  mine.  I,  born  in  a  foreign  land,  pay 
my  tribute  to  Americanism?  Yes;  for  to 
me  the  word  'Americanism,'  true  Ameri- 
canism, comprehends  the  noblest  ideas 
which  ever  swelled  a  human  heart  with 
noble  pride." 

Then  follows  a  clear  description  of  the 
first  train  of  emigrants  that  left  his  home 
on  the  Rhine  among  the  famous  Seven 
Mountains,  of  the  deep  impressions  that 
the  sad  farewell  made  upon  his  young 
heart  and  of  the  words  of  love  and  rever- 
ence that  all  spoke  when  they  mentioned 
"that  great  and  free  country  where  a  man 
could  be  himself." 

He  pointed  out  to  his  enraptured  listen- 
ers how  from  the  vigorous  elements  of  all 
civilized  nations  a  new  and  youthful  Na- 
tion had  been  created ;  how  this  great  Na- 
tion rested  on  the  principle  that  all  men 
are  created  equal  and  are  endowed  with 
certain  inalienable  rights,  among  which 
are  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happi- 
ness. He  showed  how  our  political 
existence  lifts  the  lowliest  of  the  human 
family  from  degradation  and  inspires  them 
with  the  elevating  consciousness  of  equal 
human  dignity;  it  accepts  "the  most  con- 
servative, for  it  makes  a  common  cause  of 
individual  rights;"  how  the  equality  of 
rights  becomes  a  mutual  protection  among 
men;  "the  general  identity  of  interests  is 
the  one  thing  that  guarantees  the  stability 
of  Democratic  institutions;"  "equality  of 
rights  embodied  in  general  self-govern- 
ment is  the  great  moral  element  of  true 
Democracy;  it  is  the  only  reliable  safety- 
valve  in  the  machinery  of  modern  society ;" 
.  .  .  "there  is  our  safety;  there,  and 
nowhere  else."  And  we  have  our  difficul- 
ties.    There  are  many  who  are  incapable 



of  independent  thought,  cramped  perhaps 
by  religious  and  other  teachings  not  in 
accordance  with  the  requirements  of  true 
Democracy.  Heterogeneous  elements,  un- 
fair aspirations  and  furious  passions  may 
apparently  threaten,  but  the  "genius  of 
true  Democracy  will  arise  and  restore 
calm.  It  is  ideal  to  say  that  inexperienced 
people  must  first  be  educated  to  self-gov- 
ernment. To  this  sophistry  the  fathers  of 
this  Republic  oppose  the  noble  doctrine 
that  liberty  is  the  best  school  for  liberty, 
.  .  ."  In  this  vein  he  continued,  resting 
his  case  not  on  the  emotional  side  of  his 
heartfelt  plea,  but  moving  step  by  step 
through  the  rational  and  judicial  aspects 
of  a  great  cause  on  which  rests  the  per- 
petuity of  our  institutions. 

The  wonderful  appeal  did  not  fail  in  its 
mission.  He  carried  conviction  and  faith 
into  the  minds  and  hearts  of  his  listeners, 
and  proved  that  lofty  ideals  have  their 
place  in  the  plain  business  of  popular  legis- 
lation and  statecraft.  He  likewise  struck 
a  blow  at  intolerance  that  has  made  it 
easier  since  to  speak  a  kind  word  for  the 
humble  and  the  neglected.  That  a  larger 
life,  politically  speaking,  has  grown  from 
these  practical  precepts  is  evident  on  all 
sides.  As  the  spirit  of  Know-Nothingism 
may  never  for  long  raise  its  head  from  the 
shadows  to  which  it  has  been  relegated,  it 
still  behooves  us  all  to  share  the  vigils  of 
the  true  patriot  who  seeks  above  all  to 
cultivate  the  spirit  of  tolerance  and  fair 
play  in  the  land  in  which  it  can  above  all 
others  be  preserved  inviolate  for  all  time. 

In  Indiana  Know-Nothingism  took  deep 
root  for  a  time.  To  the  credit  of  the 
Democratic  leaders  generally  be  it  said, 
few  of  them  faltered  when  this  intolerant 
crusade  was  at  fever  heat.  David  Turpie 
gives  this  interesting  account  of  what  hap- 
pened during  that  trying  period : 

"Although  not  a  candidate  in  1854,  yet  I 
was  an  active  participant  in  the  canvass 
then  made,  as  in  all  the  campaigns  from 
1848  onward.     The  opposition  was  at  this 

time  called  the  People's  party,  but  the 
nominations,  the  active  organization  and 
movements  of  the  party,  were  all  con- 
trolled by  clandestine  association  within 
its  lines,  known  as  the  Order  of  Native 
Americans,  commonly  called  Know-Noth- 
ings.  Our  was  made  upon  the 
principles  of  the  Democratic  platform  as 
then  announced.  Our  majorities  in  1852 
had  been  large  and  general;  there  was  ap- 
parently no  violent  opposition  to  the 
course  of  our  administration  at  Washing- 
ton, and  on  the  face  of  things  success 
seemed  probable.  The  public  campaign  of 
our  opponents  was  a  mere  pretense ;  it 
dealt  to  some  extent  with  current  issues, 
but  disclosed  nothing  of  their  real  designs 
and  policy.  We  felt,  as  the  canvass  pro- 
ceeded, that  there  was  something  ajar  in 
popular  opinion,  a  subdued  though  quite 
an  active  commotion,  but  we  were  unable 
to  divine  its  causes  or  to  locate  its  effects. 
It  became  known  from  various  sources 
that  there  were  numerous  defections  from 
our  ranks,  and  it  was  surmised  that  these 
made  additions  to  the  lodges  of  native 
Americans,  which  sprang  into  existence 
on  every  side,  yet  the  personnel  of  these 
converts  was  known  only  to  the  brother- 
hood of  the  order,  which,  in  its  first 
obligation,  bound  the  new  member  to  con- 
ceal and  deny  his  membership.  It  was  not 
until  after  the  election  that  we  learned 
with  certainty  the  aims  and  objects  of  this 
wide-spread  combination. 

"The  result  of  the  election  in  October, 
1854,  afforded  us  a  good  deal  of  informa- 
tion, and  much  more  chagrin.  A  tidal 
wave  of  great  force  and  rapidity  had 
.swept  over  our  former  constituencies.  It 
had  submerged  the  highest  and 
places  in  the  political  reserves;  it  had 
scorned  calculation,  laughed  at  prediction 
and  tossed  aside  apportionments  like  chaff 
before  the  whirlwind.  We  were  beaten  on 
the  State  ticket,  in  the  Legislature,  in  al- 
most two-thirds  of  the  counties,  and  if 
there  had  been  anything  else  to  lose  we 
.should  have  lost  it. 

"When,  however,  the  Legislature  met, 
which  had  been  elected  by  these  methods, 
when  it  had  enacted  the  Maine  law  and 
other  statutes  quite  as  obnoxious  to  the 
people  of  the  State,  a  reaction  set  in  and 
the  ebb  became  as  swift  and  .strong  as  the 
flood  had  been  in  their  favor.  Both  Whigs 
and  Democrats  abandoned  their  connec- 
tion   with    the    order,    revealed    and    de- 


19  16 

nounced  its  hidden  dogmas  and  designs, 
which  now  were  made  public  and  no- 

"This  movement  had  commenced  in  hos- 
tility to  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  but 
soon  comprised  all  foreign-born  and  nat- 
uralized citizens  in  its  proscription. 
Catholics  were  to  be  subject  to  a  special 
test  oath  of  allegiance,  and  foreign-born 
citizens  must  reside  twenty-one  years  in 
the  United  States  before  their  admittance 
to  the  franchise ;  offices  of  trust  and  profit 
were  to  be  held  only  by  native-born  Amer- 
icans; all  other  citizens  were  to  be  ex- 
cluded by  law  as  ineligible.  Americans 
must  rule  America.  The  passions  and 
prejudices  of  mankind  were  inflamed  to 
the  highest  degree  by  the  most  incredible 
rumors,  circulated  in  the  occult  councils  of 
the  lodges.  This  led  to  many  acts  of  brutal 
violence,  and  the  scenes  of  bloody  Monday, 
a  frightful  day  of  massacre  and  burnings, 
were  heralded  as  a  victory  at  the  polls  of 
true-born  Americans  against  the  rule  of 
foreigners  and  aliens. 

"The  Democratic  party  immediately 
assailed  and  denounced  this  policy  of  ex- 
clusion, appealing  to  that  liberal  and 
generous  spirit  of  the  people  which,  from 
the  beginning,  had  been  so  often  shown  in 
the  legislation  of  our  State.  This  appeal 
was  not  made  in  vain.  Our  success  in  In- 
diana in  1856  was  even  more  complete 
than  it  had  been  in  1852 ;  it  resulted  in  the 
final  overthrow  of  those  influences  of 
bigotry  and  persecution  which  had,  by 
their  stealthy  approach,  acquired  for  a 
brief  period  an  apparent  ascendancy. 

"The  prominent  figure  in  the  great  cam- 
paign against  Know-Nothingism  was 
Lieutenant-Governor  Ashbel  P.  Willard. 
.  .  .  He  was  a  wonderfully  gifted 
orator.  Before  a  popular  audience  his 
good  humor  was  invariable.  Neither  ques- 
tion, interruption  nor  contradiction  caused 
him  the  least  annoyance;  calmly  he 
awaited  the  proper  moment,  swiftly  de- 
livered his  answer  or  retort — ^the  assailant 
vanished.  With  this  constancy  of  self- 
control  he  was  not  otherwise  lacking  in 
emotion  or  sensibility;  indeed,  to  use  the 
phrase  of  the  good  people  of  that  day,  he 
was  known  to  be  uncommonly  tender- 
hearted. The  opposition  made  the  objec- 
tion to  his  selection  as  Governor  that  he 
would  empty  every  cell  in  the  penitentiary ; 
that  he  could  not  resist  importunity  nor 
repel  the  prayer  of  sympathy.    Sometimes 

he  noticed  this  objection  in  telling  his 
hearers  that  although  he  might  not  be  so 
strict  in  the  exercise  of  the  pardoning 
power  as  some  of  his  predecessors,  yet  he 
would  take  good  care  during  his  adminis- 
tration to  see  that  no  Know-Nothing 
received  the  benefit  of  the  executive  clem- 
ency. The  crowd  laughed  and  cheered, 
and  the  objection  was  forgotten.  .  .  . 
"In  dealing  with  the  dogmas  of  the  so- 
called  Native  American  Order,  he  sketched 
briefly,  at  the  close,  the  lives  and  char- 
acters of  Carroll  and  of  Arnold,  ending 
with  a  single  sentence  of  contrast :  'Bene- 
dict Arnold  was  a  Protestant,  a  native- 
born  American  and  a  traitor.  Charles 
Carroll,  of  Carrollton,  was  an  Irishman,  a 
Catholic  and  a  patriot.'  This  passage, 
much  noted  at  the  time,  may  be  even  now 
not  unworthy  of  remembrance." 

The  most  violent  anti-Catholic  dem- 
onstrations that  occurred  during  this 
proscriptive  movement  were  those  at 
Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  Cincinnati  and 
Louisville.  What  were  in  those  days 
known  as  "Plug  Uglies"  had  identified 
themselves  with  the  Know-Nothing  or- 
ganization in  some  of  these  cities.  They 
were  a  lot  of  coarse,  brutal,  ill-bred  des- 
peradoes who  had  absolutely  no  regard  for 
personal  rights  or  religious  freedom.  On 
the  slightest  pretext  they  would  make 
violent  assaults  upon  peaceable  individuals 
whose  only  offense  was  that  of  having  been  ■ 
born  on  the  other  side  of  the  ocean  or  of 
worshiping  in  a  church  hated  by  these 
ruffians.  It  was  unsafe  even  for  Prot- 
estants to  hold  church  or  Sunday-school 
picnics  if  the  membership  thereof  chanced 
to  be  mainly  of  foreign-born  men  and 
women.  To  such  extremes  were  these  acts 
of  ruffianism  carried  that  fair-minded 
Americans  of  commanding  influence  in 
their  respective  localities  felt  impelled  to 
raise  their  voices  in  unmistakable  tones 
against  this  flagrant  violation  of  real 
Americanism.  From  North  and  South, 
from  East  and  West,  were  sent  forth 
vigorous  protests  against  this  proscript- 
ive, oath-bound,  intolerant  order. 

Perhaps  the  most  lucid,  logical  and  ex- 




haustive  treatment  that  was  made  of  the 
Know-Nothing,  oi-  native  American, 
propaganda  is  found  in  a  letter  written  by 
Governor  Henry  A.  Wise,  of  Virginia,  in 
September,  1854,  of  which  the  following  is 
an  epitome,  or  rather  an  abridgment,  for 
his  own  words  are  almost  exclusively  used : 

"I  do  not  think  that  the  present  state  of 
affairs  in  this  country  is  such  as  to  justify 
the  formation,  by  the  people,  of  any  secret 
political  societv. 

"The  laws  of  the  United  States— Fed- 
eral and  State  laws — declare  and  defend 
the  liberties  of  our  people.  A  people  free 
in  every  sense — free  in  the  sense  of  Magna 
Charta  and  beyond  Magna  Charta;  free 
by  the  surpassing  franchise  of  American 
charters,  which  makes  them  sovereign  and 
their  wills  the  source  of  constitutions  and 

"In  this  country  at  this  time  does  any 
man  think  anything?  Would  he  think 
aloud?  Would  he  speak  anything?  His 
mind  is  free :  his  person  is  safe ;  his  prop- 
erty is  secure;  his  house  is  his  castle;  the 
spirit  of  the  laws  is  his  body-guard  and 
his  houseguard ;  the  fate  of  one  is  the  fate 
of  all,  measured  by  the  same  common  rule 
of  right;  his  voice  is  heard  and  felt  in  the 
general  suffrage  of  freemen.  Would  he 
propagate  truth  ?  Truth  is  free  to  combat 
error.  Error  herself  may  stalk  abroad 
and  do  her  mischief,  and  may  make  night 
itself  grow  darker,  provided  truth  is  left 
free  to  follow,  however  slowly,  with  her 
torches  to  light  up  the  wreck !  Why,  then, 
should  any  portion  of  the  people  desire  to 
retire  in  secret  and  by  secret  means  to 
propagate  a  political  thought,  or  word,  or 
deed  by  stealth?  If  it  be  good,  why  not 
make  the  good  known  ?  Why  not  think  it, 
speak  it,  write  it,  act  it  out  openly  and 
aloud?  Or  is  it  evil  which  loveth  the  dark- 
ness rather  than  the  light? 

"Here  is  proposed  a  great  primary, 
national  organization,  in  its  inception — 
what?  Nobody  knows.  To  do  what? 
Nobody  knows.  How  organized?  Nobody 
knows.  Governed  by  whom?  Nobody 
knows.  How  bound  ?  By  what  rites  ?  By 
what  test  oaths?  By  Avhat  limitations  and 
restraints?  Nobody,  nobody  knows!  All 
we  know  is  that  persons  of  foreign  birth 
and  of  the  Catholic  faith  are  proscribed; 
and  so  are  all  others  who  don't  proscribe 
these  at  the  polls.  This  is  certainly  against 
the  spirit  of  Magna  Charta. 

"Our  condition  of  freedom  at  home 
shows  no  necessity  for  such  a  secret  or- 
ganization with  its  antagonism  to  the  very 
basis  of  American  rights.  The  proportion 
of  native  born  to  foreigners  in  the  country 
is  as  eight  to  one,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
latter  are  already  naturalized  citizens. 
The  proportion  of  Prote.stants  to  Catholics 
is  twenty-one  to  one.  What  is  the  neces- 
sity for  this  master  majority  to  resort  to 
secret  organization  against  the  minority? 
To  retire  in  secret  with  such  a  majority, 
does  it  not  confess  to  something  which 
dares  not  subject  itself  to  the  scrutiny  of 
knowledge?  Cannot  the  Know-Nothings 
trust  to  the  leading  Protestant  churches  to 
defend  themselves  and  the  souls  of  all  the 
saints  and  sinners,  too,  against  the  influ- 
ence of  Catholics?  Can't  they  trust  the 
patriotism  and  fraternity  of  natives  to 
guard  the  land  against  immigrants?  As 
to  their  religion,  I  ask  them.  Why  not  rely 
on  God?  And  do  the  Know-Nothings 
imagine  that  pride  and  love  of  country  are 
so  dead  that  secret  organizations  are  neces- 
sary to  beget  a  new-born  patriotism  to 
protect  us  from  foreign  influence? 

"Now,  in  defense  of  our  people,  I  say  for 
them  that  no  people  on  earth  are  more 
possessed  with  nationality  as  a  strong 
passion  than  the  people  of  the  United 
States  of  North  America.  Nowhere  have 
any  people  such  certainty  of  the  reward  of 
vigilance;  nowhere  have  they  such  free- 
dom of  self-government;  nowhere  is  there 
such  trained  hatred  of  kings,  lords  and 
aristocrats;  nowhere  is  there  more  self- 
independence  or  more  independence  of  the 
Old  World  and  its  traditions — in  a  word, 
nowhere  is  there  a  country  whose  people 
have,  by  birthright,  a  tithe  of  what  our 
people  have  to  make  them  love  that  land 
which  is  their  country  and  that  spot  which 
is  their  home.  No !  As  long  as  the  mem- 
ory of  George  Washington  lives,  as  long  as 
there  is  a  22nd  of  February  or  a  Fourth 
of  July,  as  long  as  the  everla.sting  moun- 
tains of  this  continent  stand  and  our 
Father  of  Waters  flows,  there  will  be 
fathers  to  hand  down  the  stories  to  make 
our  hearts  glad  and  mothers  to  sing  'Hail 
Columbia'  to  their  babes — and  that  song  is 
not  yet  stale.  There  is  no  need  of  a  secret 
society  to  revive  a  sinking  patriotism  in 
the  hearts  of  our  people. 

"And  who  would  have  them  be  selfish  in 
their  freedom?  Freedom!  Liberty!  Self- 
ish and  exclusive!     Never!     Is  there  any 


necessity  from  abroad  for  such  a  secret 
political  organization  ?  Against  whom  and 
against  what  is  it  leveled?  Against  for- 
eigners by  birth.  When  we  were  as  weak  as 
three  millions  we  relied  largely  on  foreign- 
ers by  birth  to  defend  us  and  aid  us  in 
securing  independence.  Now  that  we  are 
twenty-two  millions  strong,  how  is  it  we 
are  become  so  weak  in  our  fears  as  to  ap- 
prehend we  are  to  be  deprived  of  our 
liberties  by  foreigners?  Verily  this 
seemeth  as  if  the  Know-Nothings  were  re- 
versing the  order  of  things,  or  that  there 
is  a  different  feeling  from  that  of  fear  aris- 
ing from  a  sense  of  weakness.  It  comes 
from  a  proud  consciousness  of  over-ween- 
ing strength,  which  would  say  to  the 
friends  of  freedom  abroad,  'We  had  need 
of  you  when  we  were  weak,  but  now  we 
are  so  independent  of  you  that  we  are  not 
compelled  to  allow  you  to  enjoy  our  re- 
publican privileges.'  But  this  secret 
organization  is  leveled  not  only  against 
foreigners  by  birth,  but  against  the  Pope 
of  Rome.  There  was  a  time  when  the  very 
name  'Papa'  frightened  us  as  the  children 
of  a  nursery.  But  how  now  with  the 
papacy  shorn  of  its  temporal  sovereignty? 
The  idea  of  the  Pope's  domination  at  this 
day  is  as  preposterous  as  that  of  the  return 
of  the  Gunpowder  Plot.  Protestants  and 
natives  are  here  both  free  and  strong.  Do 
they  wish  in  turn  to  persecute  and  exclude 
the  down-trodden  of  the  earth?  God  for- 

"As  a  Nation  we  are  but  seventy-eight 
years  of  age.  And  the  ancestors  of  this 
people,  about  two  centuries  ago,  were  for- 
eigners, every  one  of  them  coming  to  the 
shores  of  this  country  to  take  it  away  from 
the  aborigines  and  to  take  possession  of  it 
by  authority,  directly  or  indirectly,  of  the 
Papal  power.  His  Holiness,  the  Pope,  was 
the  great  grantor  of  all  the  new  countries 
of  North  America.  Foreigners,  in  the 
name  of  the  Pope  and  Mother  Church,  took 
possession  of  North  America,  to  have  and 
to  hold  the  same  to  their  heirs  against  the 
heathen  forever!  And  now  already  their 
descendants  are  for  excluding  foreigners 
and  the  Pope's  followers  from  an  equal  en- 
joyment of  this  same  possession.  Much  of 
the  early  settlement  was  due  to  the  force 
and  constraint  of  religious  inhabitants. 
Puritans,  Huguenots,  Cavaliers,  Catholics, 
Quakers,  all  came  to  the  Western  wilds, 
each  in  turn  persecuted  and  persecuting 
for  opinion's  sake. 

"The  American  Revolution  made  a  new 
era  to  dawn — the  era  of  liberty  of  con- 
science. Is  it  now  proposed  that  we  shall 
go  back  to  the  deeds  of  the  dark  ages  of 
despotism?  I  trust  that  a  design  of  that 
intent  shall  remain  a  secret  buried  for- 

"Our  laws  sprang  from  the  necessity  of 
the  condition  of  our  early  settlers.  The 
neglect  of  the  mother  country  left  the 
settlers  self-dependent  and  self-reliant 
until  they  were  thoroughly  taught  the  les- 
son of  self-government.  They  knew  pri- 
vation, fatigue,  endurance,  self-denial, 
fortitude — and  were  madmen  at  arms — 
cautious,  courageous,  generous,  just  and 
trusting  God.  They  had  an  unexplored 
continent  to  subdue  and  they  needed  popu- 
lation, more  fellow-settlers,  more  foreign- 
ers to  immigrate  and  aid  them  in  the  task 
of  founders  of  empire.  They  grew  and 
thrived  until  they  were  rich  enough  to  be 
taxed,  and  wise  enough  to  perceive  that 
taxation  without  representation  is  tyran- 
ny. The  attempt  of  Great  Britain  to 
impose  such  taxation  and  their  resolve 
never  to  submit  to  it  brought  on  the  alter- 
native of  war,  and  they  all,  foreigners  and 
natives.  Catholics  and  Protestants,  took 
the  dire  alternative,  united  as  a  band  of 
brothers,  and  declared  their  dependence  on 
God  alone.  And  they  entered  to  the  world 
a  complaint  of  grievances — a  Declaration 
of  Independence.  One  of  their  first  com- 
plaints was  that  King  George  was  striving 
to  prevent  the  population  of  the  country 
by  obstructing  the  naturalization  of  for- 
eigners. Another  was  that  they  had  made 
a  vain  appeal  for  justice  to  their  British 
brethren,  because  of  which  they  were 
driven  to  hold  them  as  the  rest  of  man- 
kind— 'enemies  in  war,  in  peace  friends.' 
Then  finally  to  uphold  their  liberties  they 
mutually  pledged  'their  lives,  their  for- 
tunes and  their  sacred  honor.'  And  M^ho 
are  they  that,  relying  on  the  same  God, 
made  this  solemn  pledge?  There  was 
Hancock  the  Puritan,  Penn  the  Quaker, 
Rutledge  the  Huguenot,  Carroll  the  Cath- 
olic, Lee  the  Cavalier,  Jefferson  the  Free- 
thinker. There  were  representatives  of  all 
the  signers,  and  the  signers  were  repre- 
sentative of  all  the  people  of  all  the  colo- 
nies. Did  not  this  pledge  bind  them,  bind 
us,  their  heirs,  forever  to  faith  and  hope  in 
God  and  to  charity  for  each  other — to 
tolerance  in  religion  and  to  mutuality  in 
political  freedom? 



1  8  1  6  -  1  0  1  (; 

"But  this  organization  is  not  only 
opposed  to  the  spirit  of  our  institutions, 
but  seeks  to  annul  the  letter  of  our  laws 
and  constitutions.  For  the  Virginian,  the 
Declaration  of  Rights  adopted  June  12, 
1776,  is  the  fundamental  law.  This  in- 
strument declares  that  'no  man  or  set  of 
men  are  entitled  to  exclusive  or  separate 
emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  com- 
munit.v,  but  in  consideration  of  public 
services,  which,  not  being  descendible, 
neither  ought  public  offices  to  be  heredi- 
tary.' Yet  these  Know-Nothings  seek  to 
confine  all  offices  to  native  Protestants. 
The  Declaration  of  Rights  further  asserts 
that  'all  men  are  equally  entitled  to  the 
free  exercise  of  religion  according  to  the 
dictates  of  conscience,  and  that  it  is  the 
mutual  duty  of  all  to  practice  Christian 
forbearance,  love  and  charity  toward  each 
other.'  But  this  secret  society  puts  a 
penalty  upon  the  Catholic,  to  say  nothing 
of  its  lack  of  Christian  charity. 

"Know-Nothingism  also  seeks  the 
amendment  of  the  naturalization  laws  of 
the  Nation  and  therein  contravenes  Amer- 
ican spirit  and  practice.  One  of  the  best 
fruits  of  the  American  Revolution  was  to 
establish  for  the  first  time  in  the  world 
the  human  right  of  expatriation.  Prior  to 
our  separate  existence  as  a  Nation  of  the 
earth  the  despotism  of  the  Old  World  had 
made  a  law  unto  themselves  whereby  they 
could  hold  forever  in  chains  those  of  man- 
kind who  were  so  unfortunate  as  to  be 
born  their  subjects.  In  respect  to  birth- 
right and  the  right  of  expatriation,  and 
the  duty  of  allegiance  and  protection,  and 
the  law  of  treason — crowned  heads  held  to 
the  ancient  dogma,  'Once  a  citizen,  always 
a  citizen.'  If  a  man  was  so  miserable  as 
to  be  born  the  slave  of  a  tyrant,  he  must 
remain  his  slave  forever.  He  could  never 
renounce  his  ill-fated  birthright,  never 
forswear  the  allegiance  that  bound  him  to 
its  chains,  and  could  never  expatriate  him- 
self to  a  better  country.  If  America 
beckoned  to  him  to  fly  to  her  for  freedom 
and  give  to  her  the  cunning  and  the 
strength  of  his  right  arm  to  help  work  out 
her  destiny,  he  must  obtain  permission  and 
passport  or  be  regarded  as  a  fugitive  from 
justice.  But  the  foreigners  came,  and 
early  in  the  Revolutionary  war  some  of 
the  best  blood  of  the  colonies  were  hung  by 
the  king's  forces,  under  the  maximum  of 
'Once  a  citizen,  always  a  citizen.'  Only 
Washington's    threat    of    retaliation    on 

British  prisoners  stopped  the  barbarous, 
arbitrary  practice.  At  last  our  struggle 
ended  and  Cieorge  III  was  compelled  to  re- 
nounce his  claim  for  our  allegiance.  Still 
Europe  was  loth  to  give  up  its  dogma,  but 
the  leathers  boldly  defied  her  and  placed  in 
the  constitution  the  authority  of  Congress 
'to  establish  a  uniform  rule  for  naturaliza- 
tion.' The  rule  was  established,  and  this 
great  land  made  one  vast  asylum  for  the 
oppressed  of  every  other  land,  and  under 
its  provisions  the  best  blood  of  Europe  has 
come  to  our  shores,  received  protection 
and  repaid  our  fostering  care  by  helping 
to  upbuild  our  Nation.  These  immigrants 
have  become  in  every  respect  American 
citizens,  endowed  with  all  our  freedom. 
They  have  been  free  to  fight  for  the  flag 
and  they  have  fought  for  it  with  a  bearing 
and  sense  of  patriotic  duty  which  prove 
them  worthy  fellow-citizens.  The  war  of 
1812  was  partly  due  to  our  assertion  of 
the  right  of  expatriation  by  the  foreigner 
and  his  naturalization  by  this  Government. 
Does  this  secret  organization,  which 
opposes  naturalization,  wish  to  uphold  the 
claim  of  England  against  that  of  the 
United  States?  Yet  that  is  the  logical  re- 
sult of  its  position  in  regard  to  foreigners. 
"Again,  Know-Nothingism  strikes  at 
the  very  equality  of  citizenship  by  denying 
to  the  Catholic  or  the  foreign-born  the 
right  to  be  eligible  to  ofhce.  If  these  are 
granted  citizenship  and  yet  proscribed 
from  office,  they  must  be  rated  as  an  in- 
ferior class — an  excluded  class.  The  law, 
it  is  true,  does  not  exclude  them.  Would 
the  Know-Nothings,  if  they  had  the  power, 
formally  enact  such  exclusion  ?  At  present 
for  them,  by  secret  combination,  to  make 
this  class  unequal,  to  impose  a  burden  or 
restriction  on  their  privileges  which  the 
law  does  not,  is  to  .set  themselves  up  above 
the  law  and  to  supersede  by  private  and 
secret  authority,  intangible  and  irresponsi- 
ble, the  rule  of  public,  political  right. 

"There  is  no  middle  ground  in  respect  to 
naturalization.  If  we  let  foreigners  be 
naturalized  and  don't  extend  to  them 
equality  of  privileges,  we  set  up  classes 
and  distinctions  of  persons  wholly  opposed 
to  republicanism.  The  Federal  Constitu- 
tion especially  provides  that  no  religious 
test  shall  ever  be  required  as  a  qualification 
to  any  office  or  public  trust  under  the 
United  States.  The  Know-Nothing  vio- 
lates the  Constitution  every  time  he  re- 
fuses to  vote  for  a  candidate  because  he  is 




a  Catholic.  Protestantism,  in  the  days  of 
the  Reformation,  protested  against  se- 
crecy; it  protested  against  shutting  out 
the  light  of  truth;  it  protested  against 
proscription,  bigotry  and  intolerance.  It 
loosened  all  tongues  and  fought  the  owls 
and  bats  of  night  with  the  light  of  merid- 
ian day.  The  argument  of  the  Know- 
Nothings  is  the  argument  of  silence.  The 
order  ignores  all  knowledge.  And  its  pro- 
scription can't  arrest  itself  within  the 
limit  of  excluding  Catholics  and  natural- 
ized citizens.  It  must  proscribe  natives 
and  Protestants  both,  who  will  not  consent 
to  unite  in  proscribing  Catholics  and  nat- 
uralized citizens.  Nor  is  this  all;  it  must 
necessarily  extend  itself  to  the  business  of 
life  as  well  as  to  political  preferments. 
Witness  the  dismissal  of  schoolmistresses 
from  the  schools  of  Philadelphia,  and  car- 
penters from  a  building  in  Cincinnati. 

'"But  Know-Nothingism  is  also  opposed 
to  the  faith,  hope  and  charity  of  the  gospel. 
Protestants  did  not  oppose  proscription 
because  it  was  a  policy  of  Catholics,  but 
they  opposed  Catholics  because  they  em- 
ployed proscription.  Proscription,  not 
Catholics,  was  the  odium  to  them.  Here, 
now,  is  Know-Nothingism  combating  pro- 
scription with  proscription,  exclusiveness 
with  exclusiveness.  Toleration  by  Ameri- 
can example  had  begun  its  march  through- 
out the  earth.  It  trusted  in  the  power  of 
truth,  had  faith  in  Christian  love  and 
charity  and  in  the  certainty  that  God  would 
decide  the  contest.  Here,  now,  is  an  order 
proposing  to  destroy  the  effect  of  our 
moral  example. 

"Again,  it  is  against  the  peace  and 
purity  of  the  Protestant  churches,  and  in 
aid  of  priestcraft  within  their  folds  to 
secretly  organize  orders  for  religions 
combined  with  political  ends.  The  world 
outside  of  the  churches  will  be  set  at  war 
with  the  sects  who  unite  in  this  crusade 
against  tolerance  and  freedom  of  con- 
science and  of  speech.  Freemen  will  not 
submit  to  have  the  Protestant  any  more 
than  the  Catholic  churches  attempt  to 
influence  political  elections.  Protestant 
priestcraft  is  cousin-german  to  Catholic, 
and  the  worst  union  that  could  be  devised 
is  that  of  church  and  State.  The  State  will 
prostitute  and  corrupt  any  church  which 
is  connected  with  it,  and  any  State  church 
will  enslave  any  State. 

"Know-Nothingism  is  against  free  civil 
government     by      instituting     a      secret 

oligarchy  beyond  the  reach  of  popular  and 
public  scrutiny  and  supported  by  blind 
instruments  of  tyranny  bound  by  test- 
oaths.  Nobody  knows  who  constitute  the 
supreme  council  of  the  order  or  how  many 
there  are  or  where  they  are.  Their  ad- 
herents are  sworn  to  secrecy.  Their  blows 
cannot  be  quarreled  against,  for  they  strike 
not  boldly,  like  men,  but  in  the  dark,  like 
assassins.  How  long  will  stand  the  pillars 
of  freedom  of  speech  and  of  the  press  when 
liberty  of  conscience  is  gone  and  birth  is 
made  to  'make  the  man?' 

"Know-Nothingism  is  opposed  to  our 
progress  as  a  Nation.  Did  any  nation  ever 
so  grow  as  we  have  done  under  our  broad, 
liberal  policy  and  our  laws  of  naturaliza- 
tion? "They  have  not  made  aristocracies, 
but  sovereigns  and  sovereignties  of  the 
people  of  the  West.  They  have  strength- 
ened the  stakes  of  our  dominion  and 
multiplied  the  sons  and  daughters  of 
America  so  that  now  she  could  muster  an 
army,  if  need  be,  that  would  bid  defiance 
to  any  invader.  Now,  shall  all  this  policy 
and  its  proud  and  happy  fruits  be  cast 
aside  for  a  contracted  and  selfish  scheme 
of  intolerance  and  exclusion?  Shall  no 
asylum  be  left  open  to  the  poor  and 
oppressed  of  Europe?  Shall  the  growth  of 
our  population  be  arrested?  Shall  prog- 
ress be  made  to  stand  still?  Are  we 
surfeited  with  prosperity?" 

Governor  Wise  concludes  his  masterly 
manifesto  with  this  earnest  appeal  to  the 
sober  judgment  of  the  American  people: 

"We  have  institutions  that  can  embrace 
a  world-all  mankind  with  all  their  opin- 
ions, prejudices  and  passions,  however 
diverse  and  clashing,  provided  we  adhere 
to  the  law  of  Christian  charity  and  of  free 
toleration.  Nothing,  nothing  is  so  dan- 
gerous to  these  institutions;  nothing  can 
destroy  them  so  soon  and  so  certainly  as 
secret  societies  formed  for  political  and 
religious  ends  combined,  founded  on  pro- 
scription and  intolerance,  without  neces- 
sity, against  law,  against  the  spirit  of  the 
Christian  reformation,  against  the  whole 
scope  of  Protestantism,  against  the  faith, 
hope  and  charity  of  the  Bible,  against  the 
peace  and  purity  of  the  churches,  against 
human  progress,  against  national  acquisi- 
tions, against  American  hospitality  and 
courtesy,  against  American  maxims  of 
expatriation  and  allegiance  and  protection, 
against    American    settlements   and    land 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

ordinances — against  Americanism  in 
every  sense  and  shape.  Hence,  as  a  Prot- 
estant American  in  every  fiber  and  in 
every  feeling,  with  all  my  hand  and  all  my 
heart  and  all  my  might,  in  every  character 
and  in  every  sense,  I  protest  against  this 
secret  organization,  which  seeks  to  pro- 
scribe Roman  Catholics  and  naturalized 


Clear,  explicit  and  unequivocal  was  the 
attitude  of  Indiana's  Democracy  with  ref- 
erence to  the  proscriptive  policies  of  the 
Know-Nothing  party.  In  convention  as- 
sembled at  Indianapolis,  January  8,  1856, 
the  party  defined  its  position  by  proclaim- 
ing these  ringing  declarations: 

"Resolved,  We  recognize  the  great  body 
of  the  people  as  the  only  tribunal  for  the 
decision  of  questions  affecting  their  gov- 
ernment, both  as  to  men  and  measures, 
and  open  appeals  to  their  reason  and  pa- 
triotism as  the  legitimate  means  of  influ- 
encing their  action,  and  we  utterly 
condemn  all  associations  and  combinations 
for  political  purposes  formed  to  govern 
them  by  oaths  and  obligations,  or  other 
compulsory  means,  or  to  impair  the  exer- 
cise of  free  will  and  independent  judgment 
among  them;  and  we  hold  in  abhorrence 
all  secret  political  orders  and  organiza- 
tions, deeming  them  dangerous  to  the 
stabiHty  of  government  and  the  rights  of 
the  people. 

"Resolved,  We  are  in  favor  of  religious 
toleration,  as  the  founders  of  our  republi- 
can institutions  achieved  and  understood 
it,  and  secured  its  enjoyment  by  constitu- 
tional guaranties,  and  we  declare  that  it 
ought  to  be  maintained  free  from  invasion 
either  by  means  of  legislative  interference 
or  the  equally  tyrannical  proscription  of 
political  parties  founded  on  bigotry  and 
ideas  of  intolerance. 

"Resolved,  While  we  esteem  it  the  duty 
of  government  to  foster  and  protect  re- 
ligion without  invidious  preferences, 
leaving  all  free  to  choose  among  denomina- 
tions according  to  their  consciences,  and 
while  we  esteem  it  the  part  of  true  re- 
ligion, under  every  form,  to  render 
allegiance  and  due  support  to  government, 
recognizing  the  Constitution  as  the  su- 
preme law  in  all  temporal  and  political 
concerns,  we  hold  the  separate  administra- 

tion of  the  aff"airs  of  church  and  State 
essential  to  prevent  that  union  of  the  two, 
which  experience  has  shown  to  be  per- 
nicious to  both  and  the  worst  form  of 

"Resolved,  That  our  naturalization  laws, 
our  republican  institutions,  our  marvelous 
growth  of  national  greatness  and  the  hap- 
piness of  our  people,  have  been  and  are 
irresistible  inducements  and  invitations  to 
the  inhabitants  of  less  favored  lands  to 
become  citizens  of  ours,  and  that  past  ex- 
perience, justice,  sound  policy  and  national 
pride  all  concur  to  favor  the  continuance 
of  our  present  naturalization  laws;  that 
if  any  abuses  have  grown  up  under  those 
laws,  they  have  sprung  from  their  imper- 
fect execution  alone  and  not  from  inherent 
defects  in  the  laws  themselves,  and  that 
we  are  in  favor  of  that  policy  which  will 
soonest  assimilate  naturalized  citizens 
with  the  mass  of  our  people,  and  opposed 
to  that  anti-American  and  illiberal  policy 
which  proscribes  the  foreign-born  citizen 
for  the  accident  of  birth  and  drives  him  to 
self-defense,  to  antagonism  with  our  na- 
tive-born citizens  in  feeling,  political 
opinions  and  conduct." 

More  than  one-half  of  the  platform  was 
devoted  to  the  subject  covered  by  the  fore- 
going resolutions,  which  in  itself  serves  as 
an  indication  of  the  strong  feeling  enter- 
tained by  Indiana  Democrats  in  opposition 
to  the  heresies  so  ably  and  so  vigorously 
dissected  by  Governor  Wise. 


The  author  of  this  book  was,  during  the 
rage  of  Know-Nothingism,  serving  his 
apprenticeship  in  the  printing  establish- 
ment of  George  Bergner,  at  Harrisburg, 
Pa.  In  addition  to  conducting  a  printing 
establishment,  Mr.  Bergner  was  engaged 
in  the  book  and  stationery  business  on 
Market  street,  next  to  what  was  later  on 
known  as  the  Lochiel  Hotel,  named  in 
honor  of  General  Simon  Cameron,  whose 
country  residence  east  of  Harrisburg  bore 
the  Scotch  name  of  "Lochiel."  Diagonally 
across  from  the  Bergner  book  store  was  a 
rival  concern,  owned  and  operated  by  one 
William  D.  Jack,  a  full-fledged  member  of 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1 

the  Know-Nothing  organization.  Mr. 
Bergner  was  born  in  Germany,  but  came 
to  this  country  with  his  parents  in  early 
infancy.  He  married  into  a  purely  Amer- 
ican family,  none  of  whom  could  speak 
German.  In  his  religious  affiliation  Mr. 
Bergner  was  a  member  of  the  English 
Lutheran  congregation ;  politically  he  was 
a  Whig,  and  later  on  an  ardent  Republican 
— the  publisher  of  an  orthodox  Republican 
daily  newspaper.  Pandering  to  the  pro- 
scriptive  spirit  of  that  time,  Mr.  Jack,  in 

advertising  his  book,  periodical  and  sta- 
tionery business,  used  these  words  in  his 
circulars  and  newspaper  advertisements: 
"Buy  your  books,  periodicals  and  station- 
ery of  an  American  in  preference  to  a 
Hessian."  The  mere  citation  of  such 
boorishness  illustrates  more  strikingly 
than  could  be  done  through  and  by  elab- 
orate comment  the  meanness,  narrowness 
and  prescriptive  spirit  that  then  warped 
the  minds  of  so  large  a  number  of  zealots 
who  made  the  accident  of  birth  the  su- 
preme test  of  citizenship. 

[Chapter  XXV.] 




HE  Fusion  triumph  of  1854  in 
Indiana  did  not  possess  staying 
qualities.  As  a  result  of  the 
splendid  campaigning  carried 
on  by  Lieutenant-Governor 
Ashbel  P.  Willard  and  his  co- 
laborers  in  the  cause  of  De- 
mocracy, the  inroads  made  upon  the  ranks 
of  the  party  in  1854  were  effaced,  popular 
confidence  in  the  party's  cause  restored  and 
Fusionism  effectively  repelled  at  the  polls. 
The  State  convention  was  held  January 
10,  Judge  James  G.  Reid,  of  Clark  county, 
temporarily  presiding.  That  the  Bright 
element  was  in  the  saddle  was  made  mani- 
fest by  the  election  of  John  L.  Robinson, 
of  Rush  county,  as  permanent  chairman  of 
the  convention,  and  the  nomination  of 
Ashbel  P.  Willard  as  candidate  for  Gov- 
ernor. Both  were  stanch  supporters  of 
Senator  Bright.  Further  evidence  of  the 
domination  of  the  Bright  element  was  fur- 
nished by  the  adoption  of  a  resolution  that 
in  case  the  national  convention  should 
conclude  to  nominate  a  western  man  for 
the  Presidency,  the  Indiana  delegation  be 
directed  to  cast  its  vote  as  a  unit  for  Jesse 
D.  Bright.  It  might  here  be  stated,  how- 
ever, that  when  the  national  convention 
assembled  at  Cincinnati  it  had  become 
quite  apparent  that  the  contest  was  be- 
tween James  Buchanan,  of  Pennsylvania, 
and  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  of  Illinois.  Un- 
der these  circumstances  it  was  not  deemed 
advisable  to  put  forward  Senator  Bright. 
Instead,  the  Indiana  delegation  was  lined 
up  for  Pennsylvania's  favorite  .son,  James 
Buchanan,  whose  nomination  was  accom- 
plished on  the  seventeenth  ballot. 

G.  W.  Carr,  of  Jackson,  and  James  H. 
Stewart,  of  Carroll,  were  named  as  vice- 
presidents  of  the  temporary  organization. 

and  as  secretaries  these  gentlemen  were 
chosen :  John  B.  Norman,  of  New  Albany ; 
John  S.  Williams,  of  Lafayette;  Solon 
Turman,  of  Greencastle,  and  Wm.  H. 
Schlater,  of  Richmond. 

Committee  on  Resolution.s — C.  Dobbins, 

C.  K.  Drew,  Horace  Heffren,  P.  M.  Kent, 
Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  J.  W.  Chapman,  Daniel 

D.  Jones,  Cornelius  O'Brien,  Lafe  Develin, 
Edmund  Johnson,  0.  K.  Dougherty,  Mar- 
tin M.  Ray,  D.  W.  Voorhees,  Wm.  M. 
Franklin,  Dr.  Jas.  H.  Stewart,  D.  C.  Stover, 
David  Turpie,  George  W.  Spitler,  Andrew 
Ellison,  Frank  P.  Randall,  D.,  and 
Dr.  Isaac  Parker. 

The  platform  adopted  by  the  Indiana 
Democracy  approved  the  principle  of  the 
compromise  measures  of  1850  and  their 
application  as  embodied  in  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  bill,  condemned  all  combinations 
for  political  purposes  and  secret  political 
orders,  stood  for  religious  tolerance,  hold- 
ing separate  administration  of  the  church 
and  State  essential;  declared  that,  while 
favoring  sobriety  and  temperance,  the 
party  was  opposed  to  the  prohibitory 
liquor  law  passed  by  the  last  General  As- 
sembly; favored  the  naturalization  laws 
then  in  effect,  and  went  on  record  as  op- 
posed to  what  was  held  to  be  an  anti-Amer- 
ican and  illiberal  policy  which  persecuted 
the  foreign-born  citizen  for  the  accident  of 
birth  and  drove  him  in  self-defense  to 
antagonism  with  our  native-born  citizens 
in  feeling,  political  opinions  and  conduct. 

A  supplementary  resolution  was  adopted 
demanding  the  dismissal  of  any  mini.ster 
of  a  foreign  government  found  to  have  di- 
rectly or  indirectly  enlisted  or  aided  in  the 
enlistment  within  the  dominions  of  the 
United  States  of  any  person  to  serve  in  a 
foreign  war. 

(  179) 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

Another  resolution  endorsed  "the  faith- 
ful Democrats  who,  in  the  last  Legislature, 
by  their  action  prevented  the  'Hindoos' 
disgracing  the  State  by  electing  one  of 
their  tribe  to  the  United  States  Senate." 


1.  J.  W.  B.  Moore,  Warrick  county. 

2.  James  G.  Reed,  Clark. 

3.  Joseph  W.  Chapman,  Jefferson. 

4.  John  L.  Robinson,  Rush. 

5.  Lafe  Develin,  Wayne. 

6.  John  P.  Dunn  and  John  Talbot,  Marion. 

7.  William  D.  Allen,  Putnam. 

8.  John  W.  Blake,  Clinton. 

9.  Samuel  L.  McFadin,  Cass. 

10.  Robert  Lowry,  Elkhart. 

11.  Andrew  Jackson,  Madison. 

Another  report  made  the  State  Central 
Committee    consist    of   these    gentlemen: 

John  Hargrove, 
M.  C.  Kerr, 
Joseph  W.  Chapman, 
John  L.  Robinson, 
Lafe  Develin, 
Charles  W.  Hall, 

John  R.  Elder, 
Daniel  W.  Voorhees, 
James  H.  Stewart, 
O.  Everts, 
Samuel  W.  Sprott, 
Wilson  Smith. 


At  Large — Graham  N.  Fitch,  Cass  county; 
Samuel  H.  Buskirk,  Monroe  county. 

District  Electors— William  F.  Parrett,  War- 
rick; Simeon  K.  Wolfe,  Harrison;  Samuel  W. 
Short,  Lawrence;  D.  Jones,  Franklin;  Edmund 
Johnson,  Henry;  Martin  M.  Ray,  Shelby;  James 
M.  Hanna,  Vigo;  Dr.  James  S.  McClelland,  Clin- 
ton; Orpheus  Everts,  Laporte;  Frank  P.  Randall, 
Allen;  S.  S.  Mickle,  Adams. 


Senatorial  Delegates — William  Rock- 
hill,  Allen;  Joseph  W.  Chapman,  Jeffer- 
son; John  Pettit,  Tippecanoe;  John  L. 
Robinson,  Rush. 

District  Delegates — Turner  Nelson, 
Posey;  John  C.  Herbert,  Knox;  P.  M. 
Kent,  Floyd;  David  Huffstetter,  Orange; 
W.  A.  Aiken,  Monroe ;  Samuel  P.  Mooney, 
Jackson;  C.  O'Brien,  Dearborn;  A.  Davi- 
son, Decatur ;  James  Elder,  Wayne ;  James 
Osborn,  Union;  Alexander  Morrison, 
Marion;  Judge  L.  Hardin,  Johnson;  G.  F. 
Cookerly,    Vigo;    William    M.    Franklin, 

Owen ;  S.  W.  Telford,  Tippecanoe ;  Mahlon 
D.  Manson,  Montgomery;  A.  A.  Whitlock, 
St.  Joseph ;  N.  0.  Ross,  Miami ;  Dr.  G.  W. 
McConnell,  Steuben;  Judge  James  W. 
Borden,  Allen ;  Gen.  James  R.  Slack,  Hunt- 
ington ;  T.  Ryans,  Madison. 

Quite  an  array  of  vice-presidents  and 
secretaries — one  from  each  of  the  eleven 
districts — was  named  to  assist  Permanent 
Chairman  Robinson  in  conducting  the 
proceedings  of  the  convention.  The  names 
of  quite  prominent  Indiana  Democrats  of 
that  period  will  be  found  in  these  two 
lists : 


1.  John  Law,  Vanderburg  county. 

2.  Col.  Schoonover,  Washington. 

3.  Gen.  John  L.  Spann,  Jennings. 

4.  James  B.  Foley,  Decatur. 

5.  James  Osborn,  Union. 

6.  General  Milroy,  Hancock. 

7.  John  Allen,  Putnam. 

8.  James  H.  Stewart,  Carroll. 

9.  Benjamin  Henton,  Miami. 

10.  R.  J.  Dawson,  DeKalb. 

11.  General  Andrew  Jackson,  Madison. 


1.  Richard  C.  Stephens,  Martin  county. 

2.  Samuel  S.  Crowe,  Scott. 

3.  James  H.  Vawter,  Jennings. 

4.  Cornelius  O'Brien,  Dearborn. 

5.  Smith  Woods,  Henry. 

6.  John  Keightly,  Johnson. 

7.  Murray  Briggs,  Sullivan. 

8.  A.  J.  Boone,  Boone. 

9.  W.  R.  Bowes,  Laporte. 

10.  Albert  Heath,  Elkhart. 

11.  William  Norton,  Huntington. 


For  Governor — Ashbel  P.  Willard,  of 
New  Albany. 

For  Lieutenant-Governor — Col.  John  C. 
Walker,  of  Laporte. 

For  Secretary  of  State — Daniel  Mc- 
Clure,  of  Morgan  county. 

For  Auditor — Gen.  John  W.  Dodd,  of 
Grant  county. 

For  Treasurer — Aquilla  Jones,  of  Bar- 
tholomew county. 

For  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruc- 




tion — Prof.  Wm.  C.  Larrabee,  of  Indiana- 

For  Attorney-General — Joseph  E.  Mc- 
Donald, of  Crawfordsville. 

For  Reporter  of  Supreme  Court — Gor- 
don Tanner,  of  Jackson  county. 

For  Clerk  of  Supreme  Court — William 
S.  Beach,  of  Boone  county. 

A  sharp  contest  was  waged  for  the  nom- 
ination to  the  office  of  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor. The  contestants  were  Col.  John  C. 
Walker  of  Laporte  and  Robert  Lowry  of 
Goshen.  Walker  captured  the  nomination 
on  a  close  margin.  John  L.  Robinson 
wanted  the  nomination  for  Governor  and 
sought  an  alliance  with  Walker.  The  lat- 
ter refused  to  enter  into  the  proposed  com- 
bination. After  the  convention  Robinson 
avenged  himself  by  looking  up  the  birth 
record  of  Col.  Walker,  whom  he  suspected 
of  not  being  of  constitutional  age  to  fill  the 
office  of  Lieutenant-Governor.  Upon  ob- 
taining conclusive  proof  that  Walker  was 
in  fact  ineligible  on  account  of  his  youth, 
Robinson  caused  the  State  committee  to  be 
called  together  for  the  purpose  of  remov- 
ing Walker  from  the  ticket  and  naming 
some  other  gentleman  for  the  place.  When 
Walker  learned  what  had  taken  place  he 
cleverly  averted  action  by  the  committee 
as  to  himself  by  graciously  tendering  his 
resignation  which,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
was  promptly  accepted.  Abram  A.  Ham- 
mond, a.  very  estimable  gentleman  residing 
at  Terre  Haute,  was  selected  to  fill  the  va- 

The  ticket  placed  In  the  field  by  the  Re- 
publicans and  People's  Party  organization 
was  headed  by  Oliver  P.  Morton  for  Gov- 
ernor and  Conrad  Baker  for  Lieutenant- 
Governor.  Though  defeated  at  the  Octo- 
ber election  in  1856,  it  is  worthy  of  note 
as  a  remarkable  coincidence  that  both  were 
•  in  subsequent  years  elected  first  to  the 
office  of  Lieutenant-Governor  and  then  to 
that  of  Governor.  Morton  had  up  to  1854 
been  a  Democrat;  Baker's  affiliation  was 
with  the  Whigs.    Both  were  forceful  char- 

acters and  particularly  strong  on  the  polit- 
ical rostrum.  Professionally  both  gained 
considerable  prestige  as  members  of  the 


Three  Presidential  tickets  were  in  the 
field  in  1856 — Buchanan  and  Breckinridge, 
Democratic;  Fremont  and  Dayton,  Re- 
publican; Fillmore  and  Donelson,  Ameri- 
can. Fremont  was  the  son-in-law  of  the 
famous  Missouri  Senator,  Thomas  H.  Ben- 
ton, and  upon  the  admission  of  California 
into  the  Union  was  chosen  by  the  Demo- 
crats to  represent  that  young  common- 
wealth in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States. 
Buchanan  had  long  been  conspicuous  in  the 
public  service  and  was  deemed  especially 
well  equipped  to  fill  the  high  office  of 
President  of  the  United  States.  Donelson 
enjoyed  the  distinction  of  having  been  the 
adopted  son  of  General  Andrew  Jackson. 
Inasmuch  as  there  was  not  the  slightest 
probability  of  his  election,  the  matter  of 
special  fitness  for  the  office  to  which  he 
was  nominated  as  the  running  mate  of 
Millard  Fillmore  was  of  minor  importance. 

Indiana  was  quite  conspicuous  in  the 
first  Presidential  convention  of  the  newly 
organized  Republican  party  in  this,  that  it 
had  for  its  permanent  chairman  Henry  S. 
Lane,  at  that  time  the  idol  of  his  party.  In 
the  Democratic  Presidential  Convention, 
held  at  Cincinnati  June  4,  William  Rock- 
hill,  of  Fort  Wayne,  was  honored  with  the 
position  of  vice-president  and  James  Elder, 
of  Richmond,  with  that  of  assistant  secre- 

On  account  of  the  close  political  relation- 
ship established  in  1854  between  Whigs, 
Freesoilers  and  Know-Nothings,  no  Fill- 
more State  ticket  was  placed  in  nomina- 
tion. Therefore  the  October  election  was 
a  contest  between  the  Democrats  and  the 
People's  party,  the  latter  embracing  the 
various  elements  that  entered  into  a  fusion 
arrangement  two  years  prior.  The  result 
of  this  election  is  indicated  in  tabular  form 
as  set  forth  below : 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

OFFICIAL  VOTE  FOR  1856.  So  far  as  the  choice  for  Congressmen 

FOR  GOVERNOR.  '^^s  concerned,  it  came  close  to  being  an 

Ashbel  p.  Willard,  Democrat 117,981  5,842      even  divide— six  to  five. 

Oliver  P.  Morton,  People's 112,139 


Abram  A.  Hammond,  Democrat 116,717  5,097 

Conrad  Baker,  People's 111,620  The  State  elections  held  in  October  clear- 

FOR  SECRETARY  OF  STATE  'y  foreshadowed  the  election  of  Buchanan 

Daniel  McClure,  Democrat 118,241  8,191     and  Breckinridge  in  November.    The  Dem- 

John  W.  Dawson,  People's 110,050  ocrats  having  carried   both   Pennsylvania 

FOR  AUDITOR  OF  STATE.  ^"*^  Indiana,  the  chances  of  the  nevi^ly  or- 

r>       T  1.    -nr  T^  jj   T^           x       fianco  c  ^no     ganlzed   Republlcan   party   sweeping   the 

Gen.  John  W.  Dodd,  Democrat 117,953  6,678      "                      .^              ,.,n, 

E.  W.  H.  Ellis,  People's 111,275  country   Without   the   aid    of    these    two 

"October    States"    must    have    appeared 

FOR  TREASURER  OF  STATE.  j^^^^j^^^  .^^^^^^  ^^^^^^  .^  .^  ^^.^^^^  ^^^^ 

Aquilla  Jones,  Democrat. . .     118,052  6,664            tremendous  strides  made  by  the  cham- 

William  R.  Noffsmger,  People's 111,388  .             ^^                        ,  ^       ,        .  ^r        ,,     , 

pions  of  Fremont  and  Dayton  m  New  York 

FOR  ATTORNEY-GENERAL  OF  STATE.  ^^^  ^^her  States  was  quite  bewildering  to 

Joseph  E.  McDonald,  Democrat....  113,439  8,171     forecasters  and  prognosticators.     Of  the 

James  H.  Cravens,  People's 103,268  Western  States,  Indiana  and  Illinois  alone 

FOR  SUPT.  OF  PUBLIC  INSTRUCTION.        were  able  to  withstand  the  tide.    The  ver- 

Prof.  Wm.  C.  Larrabee,  Democrat..  117,640  6,329     diet  of  Indiana    is    expressed    by    these 

Charles  Barnes,  People's 111,311  figures  : 


,,     J       ^              T,              4.                   110  0KQ  ^7  fiAQ                  Buchanan  and  Breckinridge.  118,670 

Gordon  Tanner,  Democrat 118,258  7,008                                ,        ,  t^     ,                       o/or,r 

-,,,,..',,  1WH  orfi  Fremont  and  Dayton 94,375 

John  A.  Stein,  People's 111,250  ■'                         „„  „o^ 

'  Fillmore    and    Donelson 22,386 

FOR  CLERK  OF  THE  SUPREME  COURT.  „      ,             ,                             ,,,,,.  ^ 

„,.„.       „  Tj      1    T^           i            ^  1  o  nnn  r, -,  nr,         Buchanan  s  vote  exceeded  that  ot  Pre- 

William  S.  Beach,  Democrat 118,297  7,177 

John  A.  Beal,  People's 111,120  mont  and  Fillmore    combined    by    nearly 


THE  VOTE  FOR  MEMBERS  OF  CONGRESS.         \r,      ^,       ..  ^,  ^._        •       t     ,- 

T     1 1,    X   T^           X                -.nnAH  Annn         Truth  ot  the  matter  IS,  Indiana  was  at 

James  Lockhait.  Democrat 12,747  4,770      ,,     ,    ,.          ,         „            ,     .               ,.      , 

James  Veach,  People's 7,977  ^hat  time  far  from  being  radical  on  the 

W.  H.  English,  Democrat 10,577  2,650     slavery  question.     As  a  rule,  Whigs  who 

John  M.  Wilson,  People's 7,927  basked  in  the  sunshine  of  William  Henry 

James  Hughes,  Democrat 10,629  1,516     Harrison  were  more  pro-slavery  than  was 

John  A^  Hendricks,  People's 9,113  ^^^^  ^^  ^^  Democrats ;  or,  to  put  it  differ- 

James  B.  Foley,  Democrat 10,451  1,452           ,,       ,,                               '                  ., 

William  Cumback,  People's 8,999  ^ntly,  there  was  more   Freesoil   sentiment 

Edmund  Johnson,  Democrat 7,183  among  Democrats  of  the   Whitcomb    and 

David  Kilgore,  People's 11,132  3,949     Wright    school    than    there    was    among 

James  M.  Gregg,  Democrat 11,787  947     Whigs  of  the  Harrison  school.     This  was 

John  Coburn.  People's. .   10,840  emphasized  by  the  action  of  the  Indiana 

John  G.  Davis,  Democrat 11,137  1,608       ,   ,         ,.         .     ^                    ..,„,„ 

John  P.  Usher,  People's 9,529  delegation  in  Congress  in  1848,  when,  on 

Daniel  w.  Voorhees,  Democrat 11,072  the  2 1st  day  of  December,  Daniel  Gott,  a 

James  Wilson,  People's 11,302  230     Representative  in  Congress  from  the  State 

William  Z.  Stuart,  Democrat 11,890  of   New   York,   introduced   the   following 

Schuyler  Colfax,   People's 12,926  1,036      resolution: 

Robert  Lowry,  Democrat 9,989 

Samuel  Brenton,  People's 10,699  710         "Whereas,  The  traffic  now  prosecuted  in 

William  Carver,  Democrat 10,443  this  metropolis  of  the  Republic  in  human 

John  U.  Pettit,  People's 11,235  792     beings,  as  chattels,  is  Contrary  to  natural 



I  8  1  G  -  1  9  1  6 

justice  and  the  fundamental  principles  of 
our  political  system,  and  is  notoriously  a 
reproach  to  our  country  throughout 
Christendom,  and  a  serious  hindrance  to 
the  progress  of  Republican  liberty  among 
the  nations  of  the  earth ;  therefore, 

"Resolved.  That  the  committee  for  the 
District  of  Columbia  be  instructed  to  re- 
port a  bill  as  soon  as  practicable,  prohibit- 
ing the  slave  trade  in  said  District." 

The  vote  on  this  resolution  stood,  98 
yeas  and  88  nays.  The  Indiana  delegation 
at  that  time  was  composed  of  Elisha 
Embree,  Thomas  J.  Henley,  John  L.  Rob- 
inson, Caleb  B.  Smith,  William  W.  Wick, 
George  G.  Dunn,  Richard  W.  Thompson, 
John  Pettit,  Charles  W.  Cathcart,  William 
Rockhill.  Six  of  these  were  Democrats 
and  four  Whigs.  Those  voting  for  the  Gott 
resolution  were  Cathcart,  Embree,  Henley, 
Pettit,  Robinson,  Rockhill — -five  Demo- 
crats and  one  Whig.  Those  voting  "No" 
were  Dunn  and  Thompson.  Not  voting: 
Smith  and  Wick.  In  later  years  Caleb  B. 
Smith  became  a  member  of  Lincoln's 
Cabinet,  and  Richard  W.  Thompson  served 
as  Secretary  of  the  Navy  under  President 

Among  those  who  voted  for  the  Gott 
resolution  was  Horace  Greeley,  who  had 
but  a  few  weeks  before  been  elected  to 
Congress  to  fill  a  vacancy.  The  surprising 
feature  of  the  proceeding  was  that  Abra- 
ham Lincoln,  serving  a  single  term  in 
Congress  from  1847  to  1849,  recorded  his 
vote  in  opposition  to  the  Gott  resolution. 
Not  a  single  vote  from  the  slave-holding 
States  was  recorded  in  its  favor,  and  only 
eighteen  Representatives  from  the  free 
States  allied  themselves  with  the  Southern- 
ers in  voting  "No."  That  Abraham 
Lincoln,  subsequently  immortalized  as  the 
"great  emancipator,"  should  be  found 
among  these  eighteen  will  no  doubt  afford 
amazement  to  thousands  to  whom  this  re- 
cital of  a  generally  unknown  historic  fact 
may  serve  as  a  genuine  if  not  startling 

YEAR  OF  1858. 

Perhaps  the  most  interesting  convention 
held  up  to  that  time  by  the  Indiana  De- 
mocracy was  that  which  convened  in  the 
city  of  Indianapolis  on  historic  Jackson 
Day,  in  the  year  1858.  It  was  at  a  time 
when  excitement  over  the  slavery  question 
ran  high,  when  lines  began  to  be  sharply 
drawn  and  when  diverging  roads  were  be- 
ing chosen  by  Democrats.  The  "irre- 
pressible conflict"  over  the  slavery  question 
made  itself  felt  among  Democrats  who,  up 
to  that  time,  had  cherished  the  hope  that 
the  spirit  of  compromise  and  conciliation 
might  continue  to  hover  over  Democratic 
councils  and  Democratic  gatherings,  and 
that  fatal  division,  for  years  dimly  visible, 
might  yet  be  averted. 

The  temper  of  the  1858  convention  was 
in  the  main  admirable.  For  the  sake  of 
party  peace,  men  of  strong  convictions 
graciously  yielded  individual  opinions  as 
to  forms  of  expression  on  burning  issues, 
trusting  that  affairs  might  so  shape  them- 
selves as  yet  to  make  it  possible  to  proceed 
harmoniously  to  the  solution  of  the 
weighty  problems  that  engrossed  the 
thought  and  attention  of  the  ablest  minds 
of  the  land. 

Though  the  vote  of  Indiana  in  the  Cin- 
cinnati convention  of  1856  was  cast  as  a 
unit  for  James  Buchanan,  the  inference  is 
not  warranted  that  Buchanan  was  the  real 
choice  of  all  the  delegates  from  this  State. 
Among  them  were  a  goodly  number  of 
admirers  and  adherents  of  the  "Little 
Giant,"  Stephen  A.  Douglas.  They  be- 
lieved in  him  ;  they  had  genuine  admiration 
for  his  extraordinary  ability  and  his 
superb  qualities  of  leadership.  The  unit 
rule  prevented  them  from  recording  their 
individual  votes  for  the  idolized  leader  of 
the  Illinois  Democracy;  they  yielded  per- 
sonal preference  to  the  conclusions  of  the 

( 183  ) 


19  1 

When  an  irreconcilable  conflict  arose 
between  President  Buchanan  and  Senator 
Douglas  with  reference  to  the  Kansas- 
Nebraska  question,  Democratic  sentiment 
in  Indiana  was  not  slow  in  asserting  itself 
on  the  side  of  Douglas  in  championing 
what  was  then  known  as  "popular  sov- 
ereignty"— the  right  of  the  people  of  a 
Territory  applying  for  admission  into  the 
Union  to  decide  for  or  against  the  intro- 
duction of  slavery.  By  lending  assistance 
to  the  slave  power  in  the  effort  to  estab- 
lish slavery  in  Kansas,  any  number  of 
those  who  in  1856  had  voted  for  Buchanan 
and  Breckinridge  became  pronounced 
opponents  of  the  Buchanan  administration 
in  its  attempt  to  foist  the  Lecompton  con- 
stitution on  the  people  of  Kansas  Terri- 
tory. The  administration  policy,  however, 
had  strong  support  in  the  two  United 
States  Senators,  Jesse  D.  Bright  and  Gra- 
ham N.  Fitch,  in  Governor  Willard,  in 
John  L.  Robinson,  and  other  Federal 
officeholders,  besides  that  always  formid- 
able element  which  believes  in  "standing 
by  the  party,  right  or  wrong." 

The  convention  was  called  to  order  by 
Joseph  W.  Chapman,  member  of  the  State 
Central  Committee.  Two  distinguished 
gentlemen  were  put  forward  for  the 
permanent  chairmanship  of  the  conven- 
tion— Governor  Ashbel  P.  Willard  and 
Congressman  William  S.  Holman.  The 
vote  stood  338  for  the  Governor  and  233 
for  the  Congressman.  Willard  having 
been  known  as  an  administration  man,  his 
triumph  aff'orded  undisguised  satisfaction 
to  that  side  of  the  house.  The  action  of 
the  convention  in  shaping  up  the  platform 
casts  some  doubt  upon  the  accuracy  of 
measurement  of  strength  as  to  Willard 
and  Holman  in  the  matter  of  factional 

Much  of  the  convention's  time  was  de- 
voted to  the  consideration  and  discussion 
of  the  platform.  In  course  of  the  ani- 
mated debate  General  Lew  Wallace,  of 
Montgomery,  offered  a  resolution  in  favor 

of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  bill,  asserting 
that  "by  practical  application  of  that  bill 
the  people  of  a  State  or  a  Territory  should 
be,  as  they  are  inalienably,  invested  with 
the  right  of  ratifying  or  rejecting,  at  the 
ballot  box,  any  constitution  that  may  be 
framed  for  their  government;  and  that 
now  and  hereafter  no  Territory  should  be 
admitted  into  the  Union,  as  a  State,  with- 
out a  fair  expression  of  the  will  of  its 
people  being  first  had  upon  the  constitu- 
tion accompanying  the  application  for 

Daniel  W.  Voorhees  spoke  sustaining  the 
resolutions  as  they  had  been  adopted, 
maintaining  they  were  the  policy  of  the 
administration  and  contending  that  the 
people  of  Kansas  were  competent  to  settle 
their  own  affairs.  The  Indianapolis  Sen- 
tinel, in  commenting  on  this  speech,  stated 
that  Voorhees  was  effective  and  concili- 
atory, his  well-toned  declarations  carrying 
conviction  to  the  mind  and  heart  of  every 

W.  S.  Holman  counseled  moderation  and 
insisted  on  the  right  of  the  States  and 
Territories  to  establish  and  maintain  their 
own  institutions. 

J.  W.  Chapman,  of  Jefferson  county, 
reported  for  the  committee  to  which  the 
resolution  had  been  submitted  as  still 
being  in  favor  of  the  great  doctrine  of  the 
Kansas-Nebraska  act,  that  the  people 
should  have  the  opportunity  of  ratification 
or  rejection,  and  contending  that  the  same 
should  accorhpany  their  application  for 

0.  K.  Dougherty,  of  Morgan  county, 
submitted  a  minority  report  reiterating 
as  above,  but  contending  that  evidence  of 
such  exercise  or  refusal  should  accompany 
the  application  for  admission. 

General  Wallace  then  withdrew  his  mo- 
tion to  lay  the  report  of  the  majority  and 
minority  on  the  table  and  moved  that  his 
original  resolution  be  submitted  therefor, 
which  carried  317  to  199. 




The  report  as  amended  was  adopted,  as 
follows:     378  ayes  to  114  noes: 

"Resolved,  That  we  are  still  in  favor  of 
the  great  doctrine  of  the  Kansas-Nebraska 
bill;  and  that  by  a  practical  application  of 
that  doctrine  the  people  of  a  State  or  of  a 
Territory  are  vested  with  the  right  of 
ratifying  or  rejecting,  at  the  ballot  box, 
any  constitution  that  may  be  formed  for 
their  government ;  and  that,  hereafter,  no 
Territory  should  be  admitted  into  the 
Union  as  a  State  without  a  fair  expression 
of  the  will  of  the  people  being  first  had 
upon  the  constitution  accompanying  the 
application  of  admission." 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  such  men 
as  Lew  Wallace  and  Judge  Holman  ex- 
pressed themselves  as  well  satisfied  with 
the  foregoing  declaration,  there  was  still 
marked  dissatisfaction  over  the  spirit  and 
phraseology  of  certain  parts  of  the  resolu- 
tions. This  was  emphasized  by  Aquilla 
Jones,  a  lifelong  friend  of  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks,  in  declining  to  accept  a  re- 
nomination  to  the  office  of  State  Treasurer 
unanimously  bestowed  on  him.  In  adopt- 
ing this  course,  Mr.  Jones  declared  that 
"one  of  the  vital  principles  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  must  have  either  been  omitted 
or  asserted  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be 
susceptible  of  an  equivocal  construction." 


1.  John  Hargrove,  Gibson  county. 

2.  Michael  C.  Kerr,  Floyd. 

3.  Joseph  W.  Chapman,  Jefferson. 

4.  John  L.  Robinson,  Rush. 

5.  Lafe  Develin,   Wayne. 

6.  Charles  W.  Hall  and  John  Elder,  Marion. 

7.  Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  Vigo. 

8.  James  H.  Stewart,   Carroll. 

9.  O.  Everts,  Laporte. 

10.  Samuel  W.  Sprott,  DeKalb. 

11.  Wilson  Smith,  Wabash. 
John  R.  Elder,  chairman. 


For  Secretary  of  State — Daniel  McClure,  Morgan 

For  Auditor — John  W.  Dodd,  Grant  county. 
For  Treasurer — Nathaniel   F.   Cunningham,   Vigo 


For  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction — Samuel 
L.  RuK'g,  Allen  county. 

For  Attorney-General — Joseph  E.  McDonald,  Mont- 
gomery county. 

For  Supreme  Court  Judges — Samuel  E.  Perkins, 
Marion;  Andrew  Davison,  Decatur;  James  M. 
Hanna,  Sullivan;  James  L.  Worden,  Whitley. 

The  campaign  was  marked  by  consider- 
able vigor,  both  parties  putting  forth 
strong  efforts  to  carry  the  State.  Though 
many  members  of  the  organization  still 
manifested  a  disposition  to  pose  as  a 
People's  party,  the  name  Republican  grad- 
ually became  more  agreeable  to  the  rank 
and  file  and  was  finally  accepted.  The 
Republican  ticket  for  1858  was  made  up 
of  these  widely-known  gentlemen: 

Secretary  of  State — William  A.  Peelle,  Ran- 
dolph county. 

Auditor  of  State — Albert  Lange  of  Terre 

Treasurer  of  State — John  H.  Harper  of  South 

Attorney-General — William  T.  Otto  of  New 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction — John 
Young,  Indianapolis. 

Supreme  Judges — Horace  P.  Biddle,  Logans- 
port;  Abram  W.  Hendricks,  Madison;  Simon 
Yandes,  Indianapolis;  William  D.  Griswold,  Terre 

Territorially,  these  selections  could 
hardly  have  been  better  chosen.  The 
ticket  was  generally  pronounced  a  strong 
one,  even  its  most  pronounced  opponents 
conceding  its  availability.  Placing  a 
capable  and  popular  German  living  in 
Terre  Haute  on  the  ticket  for  State  Au- 
ditor was  especially  adjudged  a  fine  stroke 
of  policy.  Nevertheless  the  ticket  went 
down  in  defeat — not  by  heavy  majorities, 
yet  sufficiently  so  to  serve  all  practical 
purposes.  Indiana  simply  was  not  yet 
ready  to  be  placed  in  the  Republican 


Secretary  of  State— McClure,  107,409; 
Peelle,  104,828. 

Auditor— Dodd.  107,242;  Lange,  105,- 




Treasui-er — Cunningham,  107,634 ;  Har- 
per, 105,416. 

Attorney-General— McDonald,  107,291 ; 
Otto,  105,757. 

Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction — 
Rugg,  107,910;  Young,  105,014. 
Judges  Supreme  Court — 

Worden,  107,681 ;  Biddle,  104,582. 
Davison,    107,608;    Hendricks,    104,- 

Perkins,  108,158 ;  Yandes,  104,086. 
Hanna,  107,076 ;  Griswold,  104,965. 


There  was  something  of  a  shakeup  in 
the  composition  of  the  Congressional 
delegation,  though  it  could  hardly  have 
been  designated  as  partaking  of  a  revolu- 
tionary character.  The  new  men  who 
came  in  were  James  Hughes,  William  M. 
Dunn,  Wm.  S.  Holman,  Albert  G.  Porter 
and  Charles  Case.  Wm.  H.  English  made 
his  last  race.  Four  triumphant  elections 
seemingly  satisfied  his  ambition.  He 
gained  quite  a  reputation  as  a  national 
legislator  during  the  eight  years  of  his 
service  in  the  halls  of  Congress.  Political 
upheavals  didn't  seem  to  affect  his  candi- 
dacy at  any  time ;  a  nomination  in  his  case 
meant  an  election.  After  the  breaking  out 
of  the  war  he  moved  to  Indianapolis,  en- 
gaged in  banking,  and  in  course  of  time 
accumulated  a  large  -fortune.  He  would 
have  made  an  excellent  Governor,  but 
never  aspired  to  that  office.  His  eyes  were 
fixed  upon  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States,  but  he  did  not  get  farther  in  this 
direction  than  the  obtainment  of  the 
nomination  for  Vice-President  in  1880, 
when  the  gallant  Winfield  Scott  Hancock 
was  defeated  for  the  Presidency  by  the 
scholarly  James  A.  Garfield.  That  result 
was  due  to  the  folly  of  the  Democrats 
failing  to  renominate  the  "old  ticket"  of 
1876.  No  power  on  earth  could  have  pre- 
vented a  vindication  of  the  majesty  of  the 
ballot  through  the  triumphant  re-election 
of  Tilden  and  Hendricks. 

After  the  election  of  Buchanan  to  the 
Presidency,  a  general  impression  prevailed 
that  Indiana  would  be  honored  with  a 
Cabinet  position.  Senator  Bright  and 
Governor  Wright  were  under  considera- 
tion. The  former  naturally  preferred  to 
remain  in  the  Senate  to  being  placed  at 
the  head  of  the  State  Department.  Not 
being  overly  blessed  with  the  world's 
goods.  Governor  Wright  decided  not  to 
accept  the  Secretaryship  of  the  Interior, 
for  which  he  was  so  eminently  qualified. 
He,  however,  indicated  a  willingness  to 
go  to  Europe  in  the  capacity  of  Ambassa- 
dor to  Prussia.  This  was  quite  agreeable 
to  Senator  Bright,  as  it  put  the  wide  ocean 
between  him  and  the  man  who  had  given 
him  so  much  trouble  politically  for  so  long 
a  time.  Buchanan  made  the  appointment 
quite  willingly,  and  Bright,  for  reasons 
stated,  saw  to  it  that  Wright's  appoint- 
ment was  promptly  confirmed  by  the 
Senate.  Ambassador  Wright  made  an 
excellent  record  as  such. 

GRESS FROM  1817  TO  1861 
(March  4,  1817-March  3,  1819.) 
Senate — 10  Federalists,  34  Democrats;  total,  44. 
House — 57  Federalists,  128  Democrats;  total,  185. 


(March  4,  1819-March  3,  1821.) 

Senate— 10  Federalists,  36  Democrats;  total,  46. 

House— 42  Federalists,  145  Democrats;  total,  187. 


(March  4,  1821-March  3,  1823.) 

Senate — 7  Federalists,  41  Democrats;  total,  48. 

House— 58  Federalists,  129  Democrats;  total,  187. 


(March  4,  1823-March  3,  1825.) 

Senate — 40    Democrats,    8    Whigs;    total,    48. 

House — 72  Federalists,  141  Democrats;  total,  213. 


(March  4,  1825-March  3,  1827.) 

Senate— 38     Democrats,  10    Whigs;    total,    48. 

House— 79  Federalists,  134  Democrats;  total,  213. 

(  186  ) 


18  16-1916 

(March  4,  1827-March  3,  1829.) 
Senate — 37   Democrats,   11     Whigs;     total,    48. 
House — 85  Federalists,  128  Democrats;  total,  213. 

(March  4,  1829-March  3,  1831.) 
Senate — 38    Democrats,    10    Whigs;    total,    48. 
House — 142  Democrats,  71  Whigs;  total,  213. 

(March  4,  1831-March  3,  1833.) 
Senate— 3.5    Democrats,    13    Whigs;    total,    48. 
House — 130  Democrats,  83  Whigs;  total,  213. 

(March  4,  1833-March  3,  1835.) 
Senate — 30    Democrats,    18    Whigs;    total,    48. 
House— 147  Democrats,  93  Whigs;  total,  240. 

(March  4,  1835-March  3,  1837.) 
Senate — 33    Democrats,    19    Whigs;    total,    52. 
House — 144  Democrats,  98  Whigs;  total,  242. 

(March  4,  1837-March  3,  1839.) 
Senate — 31   Democrats,  18  Whigs,  3   Independ- 
ents;    total,     52.      House — 117  ,  Democrats,     115 
Whigs,  10  Independents,  1  vacancy;  total,  242. 

(March  4,  1839-March  3,  1841.) 
Senate — 22  Democrats,  28  Whigs,  2  Independ- 
ents;    total,     52.      House— 103     Democrats,     132 
Whigs,  6  Independents,  1  vacancy;  total,  242. 

(March  4,  1841-March  3,  1843.) 
Senate — 22  Democrats,  28  Whigs,  2   Independ- 
ents;    total,     52.      House — 103     Democrats,     132 
Whigs,  6  Independents,  1  vacancy;  total,  242. 

(March  4,  1843-March  3,  1845.) 
Senate — 23    Democrats,    29    Whigs;    total,    52. 
House— 142  Democrats,  81  Whigs;  total,  223. 


(March  4,  1845-March  3,  1847.) 

Senate — 30   Democrats,   25   Whigs,   1   vacancy; 

total,   56.     House— 141    Democrats,    78    Whigs,   G 

Americans;  total,  225. 

(March  4,  1847-March  3,  1849.) 
Senate— 37    Democrats,    21    Whigs;    total,    58. 
House — 108   Democrats,   115   Whigs,   4   Independ- 
ents; total,  227. 


(March  4,  1849-March  3,  1851.) 

Senate— 35  Democrats,  25  Whigs,  2  Free  Soil; 

total,    62.     House— 116    Democrats,    111    Whigs; 

total,  227. 


(March  4,  1851-March  3,  1853.) 

Senate— 36  Democrats,  23  Whigs,  3  Free  Soil; 

total,    62.     House— 140    Democrats,   88    Whigs,   5 

Free  Soil;  total,  233. 

(March  4,  1853-March  3,  1855.) 
Senate— 38  Democrats,  22  Whigs,  2  Free  Soil; 
total,    62.     House — 159    Democrats,   71    Whigs,   4 
Free  Soil;  total,  234. 

(March  4,  1855-March  3,  1857.) 
Senate — 42  Democrats,  15  Republicans,  5  Amer- 
icans; total,  62.     House — 83   Democrats,  108   Re- 
publicans, 43  Americans;  total,  234. 

(March  4,  1857-March  3,  1859.) 
Senate— 39  Democrats,  20  Republicans,  5  Amer- 
icans; total,  64.     House — 131   Democrats,  92   Re- 
publicans, 14  Americans;  total,  237. 

(March  4,  1859-March  3,  1861.) 
Senate — 38  Democrats,  26  Republicans,  2  Amer- 
icans; total,  66.     House — 101  Democrats,  113  Re- 
publicans, 23  Americans;  total,  237. 

[Chapter  XXVI.] 





IGNS    of    the    times    in    1858 

Si  pointed  unmistakably  to  the  in- 
I  auguration  of  a  new  era  in 
1 1  Indiana  politics.  The  leaven 
was  working.  The  culmination 
could  not  be  far  in  the  dis- 

Weeks  before  the  assembling  of  the 
State  convention,  fixed  by  the  proper  au- 
thorities upon  Wednesday,  January  11, 
1860,  Democrats  throughout  the  State  de- 
termined to  take  part  in  the  deliberations 
of  this  representative  body.  The  friends 
as  well  as  the  enemies  of  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  had  become  thoroughly  aroused 
and  quietly  but  resolutely  resolved  to  take 
a  hand  in  deciding  who  should  be  entrusted 
with  the  leadership  of  the  National  De- 
mocracy, in  so  far  as  this  could  be 
determined  by  the  Democratic  sovereigns 
of  the  Hoosier  commonwealth.  So  intense 
had  become  the  feelings  of  the  warring 
elements  that  the  carrying  of  deadly 
weapons  was  by  not  a  few  considered  an 
essential  part  of  complete  and  self-justifi- 
able equipment. 

Seven  counties  had  sent  double  delega- 
tions. These  were  Hancock,  Jackson, 
Jennings,  Laporte,  Lawrence,  Randolph 
and  Spencer.  The  presence  of  the  largest 
number  of  accredited  delegates  yet  as- 
sembled in  any  State  convention  rendered 
expedient  and  necessary  the  adoption  of  a 
rule  that  only  delegates,  candidates  for 
office,  members  of  the  press  and  members 
of  the  State  Central  Committee  be  ad- 
mitted to  Metropolitan  Hall,  in  which  the 
convention  was  ordered  to  be  held.  The 
supporters  of  Douglas  had  come  to  an 
understanding  that  Judge  Robert  Lowry, 
then  proprietor  of  the  Goshen  Democrat, 

must  be  made  permanent  chairman  of  the 
great  convention.  Obstacles  were  in  the 
way,  but  by  judicious  management  these 
were  removed.  Joseph  W.  Chapman 
rapped  the  assembly  to  order.  General 
Lew  Wallace  put  Lowry  in  nomination 
for  temporary  chairman.  This  was  quick- 
ly followed  by  a  motion  that  a  permanent 
instead  of  a  temporary  chairman  be 
elected.  The  convention  was  thrown  into 
confusion,  amidst  which  Governor  Willard 
sought  to  sway  the  vast  assembly  by  his 
persuasive  eloquence.  In  this  he  was 
frustrated  by  apt  rejoinders  to  his  catchy 
phrases.  Pointed  reminders  that  he  was 
not  an  accredited  delegate  and  therefore 
not  entitled  to  the  floor  were  fired  at  him. 
This  elicited  an  ofi'er  from  White  county 
to  make  the  Governor  one  of  its  delegates. 
Finally  the  difficulty  found  adjustment  by 
the  Marion  county  delegation  announcing 
a  vacancy  in  its  ranks  and  the  election  of 
Governor  Willard  to  fill  the  same.  There- 
upon Governor  Willard  gained  recognition 
by  the  Chair  and  immediately  proceeded 
to  nominate  for  permanent  chairman 
Judge  Samuel  E.  Perkins,  of  Indianapolis. 
This  motion  was  presented  in  the  form  of 
an  amendment  to  the  pending  motion. 

Gordon  Tanner,  of  Jackson  county, 
gained  the  floor  and  said  he  "would  not 
try  to  amend  if  a  direct  vote  was  to  be 
taken  between  Judge  Lowry  and  Judge 
Perkins — Judge  Lowry,  the  friend  of 
Stephen  A.  Douglas,  and  Judge  Perkins 
as  the  administration  candidate." 

Finally  the  vote  was  taken.  It  resulted 
in  1891/2  votes  for  Lowry  and  1741/.  for 
Perkins.  A  motion  to  make  Lowry's  elec- 
tion the  unanimous  action  of  the  conven- 
tion was  adopted  by  acclamation.     J.  J. 


19  16 

Bingham,  of  Indianapolis;  John  B.  Nor- 
man, of  New  Albany;  S.  A.  Hall,  of 
Logansport,  and  Geo.  E.  Greene,  of  Vin- 
cennes,  were  made  secretaries  of  the 
convention.  All  of  them  were  editors  and 
stanch  supporters  of  the  "Little  Giant." 

So  much  time  was  consumed  in  the 
transaction  of  routine  business,  the  selec- 
tion of  a  committee  on  resolutions,  etc., 
that  the  convention  readily  assented  to  an 
adjournment  to  the  following  morning. 


Dr.  Norman  Eddy,  Lafe  Develin, 

Chairman,  A.  C.  Handy, 

A.  T.  Whittlesey,  G.  F.  Coolcerly, 

Dr.  W.  F.  Sherrod,  B.  F.  Schermerhorn, 

Paris  C.  Dunning,  Andrew  Ellison, 

Marcus  Levy,  David  Studabaker. 


Feeling  continued  to  be  intense,  though 
more  calm.  The  friends  of  Douglas  felt 
assured  that  they  had  won  the  battle,  but 
they  also  felt  that  they  must  not  rest  on 
their  oars  nor  be  found  napping. 


1.  J.  G.  Gavitt,  Vanderburg  county. 

2.  Michael  C.  Kerr,  Floyd. 

3.  Thomas  R.  Cobb,  Lawrence. 

4.  J.  J.  Schroyer,  Dearborn. 

5.  C.  E.  Shipley,  Delaware. 

6.  J.  J.  Bingham,  Marion. 

7.  B.  W.  Hanna,  Vigo. 

8.  B.  F.  Schermerhorn,  Carroll. 

9.  Norman  Eddy,  St.  Joseph. 

10.  A.  W.   Myers,  Whitley. 

11.  J.  S.  Shirley,  Grant. 

A.  B.  Palmer,  Indianapolis,  Chairman. 


Col.  John  C.  Walker,  of  Laporte,  offered 
the  following  resolution : 

"Resolved,  That  while  we  pledge  the 
support  of  the  Democracy  of  Indiana  to 
the  nominee  of  the  Charleston  convention, 
whomsoever  he  may  be,  the  delegates  to 
that  body  from  this  State  are  instructed 
to  cast  their  votes  as  a  unit  for  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  and  to  all  honorable  means 
in  their  power  to  secure  his  nomination." 

United  States  Marshal  John  L.  Robin- 

son moved  to  amend  by  striking  out  the 
name  of  Douglas  and  inserting  that  of 
Joseph  Lane. 

An  amendment  was  offered  that  each 
Congressional  district  appoint  its  dele- 
gates with  or  without  instructions;  that 
the  convention  instruct  delegates-at-large, 
and  also  all  delegates  to  vote  as  a  unit,  a 
majority  determining  their  attitude.  The 
amendment  was  lost  160  to  236.  The 
Walker  resolution  was  then  adopted — 
ayes,  265;  noes,  129. 

This  definitely  fixed  Indiana's  attitude 
with  reference  to  the  Democratic  Presi- 
dential nomination.  It  served  as  a  prelude 
to  the  formal  declaration  embodied  in  the 
platform  agreed  upon  and  reported  by  the 
committee  on  resolutions.  The  platform 
bears  evidence  of  having  been  carefully 
considered,  sentence  by  sentence,  and  as 
having  been  constructed  by  men  of  ex- 
ceptional ability.  As  an  entirety  it  may 
fairly  be  pronounced  a  masterpiece  of 
political  pronouncement,  in  accord  with 
the  then  dominant  sentiment  of  the  In- 
diana Democracy.  From  a  literary  point 
of  view  it  excelled  any  of  the  platforms 
thitherto  adopted  by  any  preceding  State 
convention.  The  party's  preference  for 
Stephen  A.  Douglas  was  set  forth  in  this 
ringing  declaration : 

"Resolved,  That  as  a  statesman  of  tried 
character,  and  a  citizen  in  whom  all  sec- 
tions of  the  Union  may  confide  their 
interests,  as  the  friend  and  supporter  of 
our  rights  at  home  and  our  honor  abroad, 
and  in  the  sincere  conviction  that  we  will 
thereby  contribute  to  secure  to  all  sections 
of  the  Union,  and  each  of  the  States,  their 
just  and  equal  rights  and  their  full  share 
in  the  benefits  of  our  Federal  Union,  and 
in  no  sectional  spirit,  but  in  the  expansive 
love  of  our  whole  country,  the  Democracy 
of  Indiana  present  to  the  convention  of 
the  American  Democracy  to  assemble  at 
Charleston  as  their  choice  for  nomination 
as  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency  of  the 
United  States,  the  name  of  Stephen  A. 
Douglas,  of  Illinois,  and  believing  him  to 
be  the  preference  of  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority of  our  people,  we  hereby  instruct 
the  delegates  this  day  appointed  by  us  to 


1   8   1   ()  -  1    9   1   () 

that  convention  to  cast  their  votes  in  his 
favor  as  a  unit  so  long  as  his  name  is 
before  the  convention,  and  to  use  all  hon- 
orable efforts  to  secure  his  nomination ; 
and  the  delegation  is  also  instructed  to 
vote  as  a  unit  upon  all  questions  which 
may  come  before  that  body  as  a  majority 
of  the  delegates  may  determine." 


At  Large — Robert  Lowry,  E.  M.  Huntington, 
Samuel  H.  Buskirk,  James  B.  Foley. 

Contingents — James  B.  Fulwiler,  John  Mc- 
Manana,  Jeremiah  Smith,  Joseph  P.  Edson. 

1.  Smith  Miller  and  John  S.  Gavitt. 

2.  J.  B.  Norman  and  S.  K.  Wolfe. 

3.  H.   W.   Harrington   and   Paris   C.   Dunning. 

4.  J.  V.  Bemusdaffer  and  C.  B.  Bentley. 

5.  Lafe  Develin  and  W.  W.  Frybarger. 

6.  W.  H.  Talbott  and  J.  M.  Gregg. 

7.  Dr.  Ezra  Read  and  Henry  K.  Wilson. 

8.  L.  B.  Stockton  and  Maj.  I.  C.  Elston. 

9.  G.  Hathaway  and  S.  A.  Hall. 

10.  Pliny  Hoagland  and  George  W.  McConnell. 

11.  William  Garver  and  John  R.  Coffroth. 

The  Eleventh  district  adopted  resolu- 
tions declaring  for  Douglas,  or  some  other 
conservative  man  entertaining  the  same 
views  on  the  Territorial  question,  if 
Douglas  is  not  chosen ;  and  that  their  dele- 
gates in  no  case  vote  for  a  man  entertain- 
ing the  view  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  carries  or  establishes 


Electors-at-Large — Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  Jackson 
county,  and  John  C.  Walker,  Laporte  county. 

Contingents — A.  A.  Hammond  and  Paris  C. 

1.  James  M.  Shanklin,  Vanderburg  county. 

2.  Thomas  M.  Brown,  Floyd. 

3.  James  S.  Hester,  Brown. 

4.  Daniel  D.  Jones,  Franklin. 

5.  William  A.  Bickle,  Wayne. 

6.  Alexander  B.  Conduitt,  Morgan. 

7.  William  M.  Franklin.  Owen. 

8.  William  C.  Kise,  Boone. 

9.  Robert  P.  Effinger,  Miami. 

10.  William  S.  Smith,  Allen. 

11.  Andrew  Jackson,  Madison. 

Colonel    Cyrus    L.    Dunham,    who    had 
been   appointed   Secretary    of    State    by 

Governor  Willard  in  1859  to  (ill  the 
vacancy  occasioned  by  the  resignation  of 
Daniel  McClure,  affiliated  with  the  Bu- 
chanan wing  of  the  party.  As  such  he 
became  an  avowed  aspirant  to  the  nom- 
ination for  Governor.  Though  pronounced 
in  his  views  as  to  party  policy,  he  was 
neither  an  extremist  nor  a  factionist.  He 
believed  in  subordinating  personal  views 
to  the  will  of  the  majority;  in  being 
"regular."  When  it  became  apparent  that 
the  Douglas  wing  was  clearly  and  unmis- 
takably in  the  ascendancy,  he  not  only 
abandoned  his  candidacy  for  the  Gov- 
ernorship, but  rose  in  the  convention,  and 
in  a  forceful,  eloquent  speech  moved  that 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks  be  nominated  by 
acclamation.  This  generous  action  on  the 
part  of  Colonel  Dunham  aroused  intense 
enthusiasm  and  had  much  to  do  with 
creating  a  harmonious  spirit  in  framing 
up  the  ticket  in  its  entirety.  Without 
serious  friction  the  ticket  was  completed 
by  naming  Judge  David  Turpie,  of  White 
county,  for  Lieutenant-Governor;  William 
H.  Schlater,  of  Richmond,  for  Secretary 
of  State;  Joseph  Ristine,  of  Fountain 
county,  for  Auditor;  Nathaniel  F.  Cun- 
ningham, of  Terre  Haute,  for  Treasurer; 
Oscar  B.  Hord,  of  Greensburg,  for  Attor- 
ney-General; Samuel  L.  Rugg,  of  Fort 
Wayne,  for  Superintendent  of  Public  In- 
struction; Cornelius  O'Brien,  of  Law- 
renceburg,  for  Clerk  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  and  Michael  C.  Kerr,  of  New  Al- 
bany, for  Reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court. 
Mr.  Hendricks  was  the  unanimous 
choice  of  the  supporters  of  Douglas.  Al- 
ways conciliatory  and  consen-ative,  Mr. 
Hendricks,  while  unequivocally  the  choice 
of  the  admirers  of  the  "Little  Giant,"  was 
not  offensive  or  even  objectionable  to  the 
moderate  adherents  of  the  Buchanan 
policy.  Resigning  the  office  of  Land  Com- 
missioner, which  he  held  part  of  the  time 
under  the  Pierce  and  Buchanan  adminis- 
trations, avowedly  for  the  purpose  of 
re-entering  upon  the  practice  of  law,  he 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

had  freed  himself  of  obligation  implied  in 
administration  affiliation  and  was  thus 
unhampered  in  the  expression  of  whatever 
views  he  might  hold  with  reference  to 
party  policy.  The  wisdom  of  his  counsel 
was  made  manifest  by  the  selection  of 
Colonel  Dunham  as  an  Elector-at-Large, 
though  not  at  the  time  altogether  appar- 
ent to  the  fiery  element  of  the  Douglas 
following.  Dunham  verified  the  excellence 
of  Mr.  Hendricks'  judgmeni;  by  taking 
the  stump  in  favor  of  the  regular  Demo- 
cratic ticket  and  delivering  a  series  of 
very  eff'ective  speeches.  Strong  efforts 
were  made  by  Senator  Bright  to  induce 
Colonel  Dunham  to  decline  the  electorship 
candidacy  and  join  the  Breckinridge 
forces;  but  though  the  ties  of  friendship 
between  these  two  men  were  strong  and 
of  long  tenure,  Colonel  Dunham  stood 
firm,  and  throughout  the  campaign  ap- 
pealed with  fervid  eloquence  to  Democrats 
to  stand  unflinchingly  by  the  regular  or- 

The  campaign  from  opening  to  close 
was  intensely  earnest,  thrillingly  interest- 
ing and  unrestrictedly  determined.  No 
Presidential  nominee,  not  excepting 
Henry  Clay,  had,  up  to  that  time,  had 
more  devoted  or  enthusiastic  supporters 
than  Stephen  A.  Douglas.  His  captivat- 
ing personality,  his  striking  physiognomy, 
his  massive  head,  and  his  persuasive  elo- 
quence made  him  the  idol  of  those  who 
rallied  under  his  banner.  That  his  cour- 
ageous defiance  of  the  slave  power  and  his 
heroic  resistance  to  the  attempt  to  force 
slavery  upon  Kansas  drew  to  him  thou- 
sands of  Democrats  who  felt  ill  at  ease 
under  the  imposition  of  policies  incon- 
sistent with  the  teachings  of  Jefferson, 
Van  Buren  and  Tilden,  had  become  plain- 
ly apparent.  These  men  felt  that  the  time 
had  come  to  command  a  halt  and  they  as- 
serted themselves  in  no  uncertain  manner. 

The  Indiana  delegation  to  the  Charles- 
ton and  Baltimore  conventions  stood 
manfully  by  the  "Little  Giant."    On  their 

part  there  was  no  wavering,  no  sign  of 
timidity  or  lack  of  courage.  Both  at 
Charleston  and  later  on  at  Baltimore  they 
stood  unflinchingly  by  their  guns.  When, 
at  the  close  of  the  drama  at  Baltimore,  it 
had  become  apparent  to  them  that  the 
party  to  which  they  were  so  strongly 
wedded  and  for  which  they  had  fought  so 
many  political  battles,  would  in  all  prob- 
ability meet  with  defeat  at  the  polls  in 
October  and  in  November,  they  started 
upon  their  homeward  journey  with  the  in- 
flexible determination  to  do  all  that  could 
be  done  to  make  as  good  a  showing  at  the 
polls  as  was  possible  to  be  done. 

The  adjourned  session  at  Baltimore  be- 
gan June  18.  Three  days  were  consumed 
in  wrangling  over  the  platform.  That  dis- 
posed of,  followed  by  the  withdrawal  of 
the  Southern  Secessionists  and  a  small 
number  of  sympathizers  from  the  North, 
the  nomination  of  Douglas  was  easily 
effected  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote. 
Senator  Benjamin  Fitzpatrick,  of  Ala- 
bama, was  nominated  for  the  Vice-Presi- 
dency, but  promptly  declining  the 
proffered  honor,  Herschel  V.  Johnson,  of 
Georgia,  was  substituted  by  the  National 
Committee,  hastily  summoned  for  the  pur- 
pose of  filling  the  vacancy. 

Vexed  by  Senator  Bright's  "pernicious 
activity"  in  working  up  opposition  to  the 
regular  nominees  of  the  party,  both  State 
and  national,  the  leaders  decided  that  un- 
usual energy  must  be  injected  into  the 
campaign.  The  middle  of  July  a  mass 
meeting  was  held  at  Indianapolis  to  ratify 
the  nomination  of  Douglas  and  Johnson. 
Twenty  thousand  enthusiastic  Democrats 
gathered  at  the  State  capital  to  give  ex- 
pression to  their  feelings.  The  speakers 
at  this  meeting  were :  Governor  Willard, 
Senator  Geo.  E.  Pugh  of  Ohio,  Congress- 
man C.  L.  Vallandigham  of  Dayton,  Sam- 
uel R.  Hamill  of  Sullivan,  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks,  Richard  J.  Ryan  and  Judge  W. 
W.  Wicks.  Mr.  Ryan  introduced  a  resolu- 
tion which,  after  some  discussion,  passed 
in  this  form: 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

"Resolved,  That  we,  the  Democracy  of 
Indiana,  in  mass  convention  assembled, 
unanimously  condemn  the  course  of  all 
those  who  are  endeavoring  to  disorganize 
the  Democratic  party  of  Indiana  by  their 
opposition  to  the  regular  nominees  of  the 
Democratic  National  Convention,  Stephen 
A.  Douglas  and  Herschel  V.  Johnson." 

The  Indianapolis  Sentinel  fought  vali- 
antly for  the  regular  ticket.  Here  is  a 
sample  of  its  onslaughts  on  the  Secession- 
ists. It  is  quoted  from  the  Sentinel's  issue 
of  July  20 : 

"The  fact  that  Breckinridge  and  Lane 
are  the  candidates  for  the  disunionists 
cannot  be  successfully  denied.  Those  of 
the  North  who  seek  to  defeat  Douglas 
swear  that  Breckinridge  and  Lane  are 
Union  men,  but  the  supporters  of  those 
candidates  at  the  South  talk  differently. 
The  Montgomery  (Ala.)  Mail  thus  openly 
avows  the  purpose  for  which  Breckinridge 
and  Lane  have  been  nominated.  That 
paper  says : 

Run  three  presidential  tickets  against  Lincoln, 
thereby  giving  Lincoln  the  best  chance  to  be 
elected.  After  I^incoln  is  elected  some  Southern 
communities — most  of  them  perhaps — will  refuse 
to  let  the  postmasters  appointed  under  his  admin- 
istration take  possession  of  the  office.  Then  the 
United  States  authorities  will  interpose  to  "en- 
force the  law."  Then  the  United  States  authori- 
ties will  either  be  shot  upon  or  they  will  shoot 
somebody  down.  Then  the  people  of  the  com- 
munity will  arise  up  against  the  United  States 
Government  and  will  be  sustained  by  neighboring 
communities  until  a  civil  war,  with  all  its  horrible 
butcheries,  envelops  the  land  in  a  shroud  of  blood 
and  carnage." 

According  to  the  Sentinel  of  September 
20,  the  friends  of  Breckinridge  and  Lane 
"Held  a  meeting  in  Indianapolis  on 
Monday  last  and  adopted  the  following 
resolutions : 

Resolved,  That  it  would  be  inexpedient  at  this 
time  to  place  a  national  Democratic  State  ticket 
in  the  field  for  State  officers. 

Resolved,  That  in  view  of  the  conciliatory  over- 
tures which  have  from  time  to  time  been  made  to 
the  friends  of  Mr.  Douglas  in  this  State  and  re- 
jected by  them,  if  the  present  State  ticket  be 
defeated  they  alone  will  be  responsible  for  the 

"Resolutions  signed  by  W.  H.  Talbott, 
chairman,  and  John  R.  Elder,  secretary." 

The  Sentinel  went  on  to  say  that  both 
of  these  gentlemen  were  members  of  the 
Democratic  State  Convention  on  the  11th 

of  January  last  and  the  candidates  upon 
the  Democratic  ticket  were  their  choice 
and  received  their  cordial  support. 

An  imposing  Douglas  demonstration 
was  held  at  Indianapolis  September  28. 
It  attracted  thousands  of  the  "Little 
Giant's"  admirers  to  the  State  capital. 
He  arrived  the  evening  before,  and  was 
greeted  by  a  large  and  enthusiastic  crowd. 
Being  tired  out  by  exhaustive  campaign- 
ing, he  retired  to  his  room  at  the  Bates 
House,  but  at  the  earnest  solicitation  of 
the  vast  crowd  appeared  on  the  balcony. 
After  a  few  fitting  allusions  to  Hoosier 
fidelity  and  enthusiasm,  Senator  Douglas 
excused  himself  and  returned  to  his  room. 

Attorney-General  Joseph  E.  McDonald 
then  introduced  Governor  David  Todd,  of 
Ohio,  who  presided  over  the  convention  at 
Baltimore  after  Caleb  Gushing,  of  Massa- 
chusetts, had  vacated  the  Chair  and 
seceded,  accompanied  by  Ben  Butler.  Gov- 
ernor Todd  delivered  a  speech  that  elicited 
unbounded  enthusiasm.  He  was  followed 
by  C.  A.  Schaefer,  of  Ohio,  and  the  bril- 
liant Indianapolis  orator,  Richard  J.  Ryan. 

The  vast  concourse  that  did  honor  to 
Senator  Douglas  afforded  high  elation  to 
his  supporters.  The  parade  was  an  im- 
mense affair.  It  was  under  command  of 
Captain  John  M.  Lord,  as  chief  marshal, 
whose  Indianapolis  assistants  were  Cap- 
tain Love,  H.  H.  Dodd,  John  F.  Gulick, 
Capt.  H.  Prosser,  Gen.  W.  J.  Elliott,  Dr. 
A.  D.  Gall,  Samuel  Hesselgesser,  J.  B. 
Ryan,  Capt.  M.  North,  S.  M.  McCarty, 
Wm.  Wilkinson,  Charles  Howland,  Samuel 
A.  Todd,  Frank  Cunningham,  Reginald  H. 
Hall,  Jacob  Mull,  George  W.  Pitts,  JuHus 
Boetticher,  John  Stumph  and  Daniel  C. 

Assistant  marshals  for  the  State  at 
large  were  George  E.  Greene,  Col.  T.  G. 
Lee,  Gen.  L.  Druley,  Gen.  J.  B.  Foley, 
Gen.  J.  P.  Drake,  Gen.  W.  D.  Allen,  Capt. 
Lew  Wallace,  Geo.  W.  Spitler,  Dr.  Geo.  W. 
McConnell,  Gen.  D.  Moss,  Capt.  Z.  Berry, 
Lafe  Develin,  Nathaniel  Lord,  Jr.,  Michael 

7— History 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

Inasmuch  as  neither  the  Breckinridge  party,  therefore  the  propriety  and  advisa- 

and  Lane  people  nor  the  Bell  and  Everett  bility  of  honoring  Lane  with  first  place  on 

supporters   placed   a   State  ticket   in  the  the  ticket.     It  seemed  also  to  have  been 

field — being  content  with  revealing  their  tacitly    understood,      if     not     positively 

strength   through    electoral    tickets — the  agreed,  that  in  the  event  of  the  Republi- 

contest  in  Indiana,  up  to  the  time  of  the  cans  securing  a  majority  in  the  Legisla- 

October   election,    was   squarely   between  ture,  Mr.  Lane  was  to  be  chosen  United 

the     tickets     headed,      respectively,     by  States    Senator,    to    succeed    Graham    N. 

Thomas  A.  Hendricks  and  Henry  S.  Lane.  Fitch,  and  that  Oliver  P.  Morton  would 

REPUBLICAN  STATE  TICKET.  then  be   afforded    opportunity    to    serve 

almost  the  entire  term  as  Governor.    The 

Governor— Henry  S.  Lane,  Crawfords-  fulfillment  of  this  agreement,  implied  or 

ville.  real,  was  rendered  possible  by  the  result 

Lieutenant-Governor— Oliver    P.    Mor-  of  the  election,  carrying  with  it,  for  the 
ton,  Centerville.  first  time,  the  election  of  the  entire  Re- 
Secretary  of  State— William  A.  Peelle,  publican  State  ticket  and  a  clear  majority 
Winchester.  of  the  Legislature. 

Auditor  of  State — Albert  Lange,  Terre 

Haute.  OFFICIAL  VOTE,  1860. 

Treasurer  of  State — Jonathan  Harvey,  GOVERNOR. 

Clark  county.  Lane 136,725       9,757 

Attorney-General— James      G.      Jones,  Hendricks 126,968 


Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction —  Morton   136,470    10,178 

Miles  J.  Fletcher,  Putnam  county.  Turpie  126,292 

Reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court — Benja-  AUDITOR, 

man  Harrison,  Indianapolis.  Lange 136,007      9,646 

Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court— John  Paul  Ristine 126,361 

Jones,  Lagrange.  SECRETARY  OF  STATE. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Oliver  P.  Peelle 136,190      9,610 

Morton  was  his  party's  nominee  for  Gov-  Schlater   126,580 

ernor  in  1856.     When  the  time  came  for  TREASURER  OF  STATE. 

nominating  the  ticket  in  1860,  it  was  a  Harvey 137,640    10,526 

question  of  expediency  as  to  whether  he  Cunningham 126,514 

should  be  assigned  to  first  or  second  place.  SUPERINTENDENT  OF  PUBLIC 

The  argument  that  finally  prevailed  was  INSTRUCTION. 

that,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  Henry  S.  Fletcher   137,129    11,383 

Lane  had  been  chosen  United  States  Sen-  ^"^g  125,746 

ator  by  Fusion  members  of  the  General  ATTORNEY-GENERAL. 

Assembly  and  denied    admission    by    the  Jones  131,472      8,201 

Senate  at  Washington  on  the  ground  of  ""'"'^ ^-^'^^^ 

irregularity,  he  should    head    the    ticket.  REPORTER  OF  SUPREME  COURT. 

Attention  was  further  directed  to  the  fact  Harrison  134,924      9,688 

that  he  was  active  in  the  Mexican  war  and  ^^"" 125,236 

that  he  enjoyed  the  sustained  reputation  CLERK  OF  SUPREME  COURT. 

of  being  among  Indiana's  most  eloquent  ^°"^^  132,933    10,120 

orators.    Fudhermore,   a   larger   number  °'^^''^"  ^^2,813 

of  Whigs  than  Democrats  had  found  their  In  the  election  of  members  of  Congress 

way  into  the  newly  organized  Republican  the  Republicans  were  successful  in  seven 



of  the  eleven  districts.  The  Democrats 
elected  John  Law  in  the  First  district, 
James  A.  Cravens  in  the  Second,  William 
S.  Holman  in  the  Fourth  and  Daniel  W. 
Voorhees  in  the  Seventh.  The  Republicans 
clothed  with  congressional  prerogatives 
William  M.  Dunn  in  the  Third  district, 
George  W.  Julian  in  the  Fifth,  Albert  G. 
Porter  in  the  Sixth,  Albert  S.  White  in  the 
Eighth,  Schuyler  Colfax  in  the  Ninth, 
William  Mitchell  in  the  Tenth  and  John 
Peter  Cleaver  Shanks  in  the  Eleventh. 
In  passing  it  may  be  stated  that  of  the 
eleven  gentlemen  chosen  as  representatives 
in  Congress  from  Indiana  in  the  year 
1860,  William  Mitchell,  a  banker  residing 
at  Kendallville,  was  alone  in  being  made 
a  single  termer.  He  was  defeated  for  re- 
election in  1862  by  Joseph  K.  Edgerton 
of  Fort  Wayne. 


There  is  a  marked  difference  in  the  vote 
cast  at  the  October  election  for  Governor 
and  other  State  officers  and  the  vote  cast 
at  the  November  election  for  presidential 
electors.  Lincoln  had  two  thousand  more 
than  Lane,  while  Douglas  fell  twelve 
thousand  behind  Hendricks'  vote.  This 
would  seem  to  make  clear  that  the  12,295 
Democrats  who  voted  for  Breckinridge 
had  generously  cast  their  ballots  for  Mr. 
Hendricks.  How  the  Bell  and  Everett 
supporters  distributed  their  favors  at  the 
October  election  the  good  Lord  only  knows. 
This  is  the  vote  for  Presidential  electors: 

Lincoln  and  Hamlin 139,033 

Douglas  and  Johnson 115,509 

Breckinridge  and  Lane 12,295 

Bell  and  Everett 5,306 

The  Presidential  electors  chosen  by  the 
Republicans  and  who  cast  the  vote  of  In- 
diana for  Lincoln  and  H.  Hamlin  were: 

At  Large — William  Cumback  of  Decatur 
and  John  L.  Mansfield  of  Jefferson. 

1.  Cyrus  M.  Allen,  Knox  county. 

2.  John  W.  Ray,  Knox. 

3.  Morton  C.  Hunter,  Monroe. 

4.  John  H.  Farquar,  Franklin. 

5.  Nelson  Trusler,  Fayette. 

6.  Reuben  A.  Riley,  Hancock. 

7.  John  Hanna,  Putnam. 

8.  Samuel  A.  Huff,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  James  N.  Tyner,  Miami. 

10.  Isaac  Jenkinson,  Allen. 

11.  David  O.  Dailey,  Huntington. 

The  Breckinridge  organization  for  In- 
diana consisted  of  an  electoral  ticket  and 
a  State  Central  Committee.  The  nominees 
for  electors  were : 

At  Large — James  Morrison,  Marion, 
and  Delano  R.  Eckles. 

1.  R.  A.  Clements,  Daviess  county. 

2.  Dr.  W.  F.  Sherrod,  Orange. 

3.  Daniel  Sheeks,  Monroe. 

4.  Ethelbert  Hibben,  Rush. 

5.  Samuel   Orr,  Delaware. 

6.  Franklin  Hardin,  Johnson. 

7.  James  A.  Scott,  Putnam. 

8.  Col.  W.  M.  Jenners,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  James  Bradley,  Laporte. 

10.  Robert  Breckinridge,  Jr.,  Allen. 

11.  John  R.  Coffroth,  Huntington. 


J.  B.  Gardner,  Levi  Sparks,  Geo.  W. 
Kyle,  Dr.  B.  F.  Mullen,  Alex.  White,  John 
R.  Elder,  James  M.  Tomlinson,  Julius 
Nicolai,  James  Johnson,  James  M.  Oliver, 
Thomas  Wood,  Thomas  D.  Lemon,  G.  F.  R. 
Woodleigh,  Dr.  F.  B.  Thomas. 

Under  the  caption,  "The  Result,"  the 
Indianapolis  Sentinel  of  November  7  com- 
mented thus  apprehensively  on  the  out- 
come of  the  Presidential  election : 

"The  telegraphic  returns  of  the  election 
yesterday  indicate  that  Lincoln  has  been 
chosen  President  by  the  vote  of  the  people. 
It  is  probable  he  will  have  the  entire 
electoral  vote  of  all  the  Northern  States. 
This  is  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the 
country  that  a  President  has  been  elected 
by  a  sectional  and  geographical  party.  Its 
effect  will  be  to  array  one  section  of  the 
Union  in  antagonism  to  the  other.  The 
issue  has  come  which  the  leading  men  of 
the  South  have  declared  will  be  sufficient 
and  justifiable  for  disunion.  A  few 
weeks  will  determine  whether  we  shall  be 
divided  into  separate  confederacies  or 
remain  united  States.  Perhaps  it  is  as 
well  to  try  the  strength  of  the  Union,  of 
the  national   Government,    now    as    any 

HISTORY     INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

other  time.  If  it  survives  this  struggle 
there  will  be  but  little  danger  of  disrup- 
tion in  the  future." 

When  the  Secessionists  left  the  conven- 
tion hall  at  Charleston,  and  later  on  at 
Baltimore,  and  decided  to  nominate  a 
ticket  of  their  own,  they  knew  full  well 
what  they  were  about  and  what  the  effect 
of  their  action  would  be.  They  knew  that 
by  dividing  the  Democratic  party  the 
triumph  of  the  Republicans  would  be 
assured.  Their  hostility  to  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  was  as  flimsy  as  it  was  malignant. 
They  used  their  groundless  animosity  to 
Douglas  as  a  pretext  for  disrupting  the 
Democratic  party,  and  later  on  used  the 
product  of  their  own  connivance,  the  elec- 
tion of  Lincoln,  as  a  pretext  for  disrupting 
the  Union.  In  their  madness  to  perpetu- 
ate slavery  they  worked  the  destruction  of 
that  institution.  It  is  ever  thus:  When 
greed  dethrones  reason,  it  inflicts  upon 
itself  the  greatest  of  all  penalties — 


There  was  substantial  agreement  among 
capable  judges  of  forensic  eloquence  that 
Governor  Ashbel  P.  Willard  was  the  most 
accomplished,  most  effective  and  most 
persuasive  orator  in  the  State.    As  Gov- 

ernor of  the  commonwealth  he  proved  him- 
self an  administrator  of  discernment  and 
marked  ability.  He  was  an  intense  par- 
tisan, yet  fair-minded  and  just  in  the 
performance  of  duty.  Though  in  the  main 
considered  a  supporter  of  the  Buchanan 
administration,  he  refused  absolutely  to 
become  a  party  to  waging  war  upon  the 
organization  when  it  chose  Stephen  A. 
Douglas  as  the  national  leader.  He  coun- 
seled moderation  and  conciliation.  His 
health  had  been  impaired;  vitality  was 
slowly  but  surely  ebbing  away.  In  the 
hope  of  prolonging  his  tenure  on  earth  he 
went  to  Minnesota.  But  the  trip  had  been 
delayed  too  long  to  produce  the  hoped- 
for  result.  Disease  was  gnawing  at  his 
vitals  and  refused  to  release  its  hold  at 
the  bidding  of  the  bracing  air  of  the 
Northwest.  On  the  4th  of  October,  1860, 
he  was  suddenly  taken  worse,  and  on  the 
evening  of  that  day  he  breathed  his  last. 
Then  and  there  passed  from  the  face  of 
the  earth  one  of  the  brightest  intellects  of 
that  period.  Under  the  constitution  of  the 
State,  Abram  A.  Hammond  became 
acting  Governor,  serving  as  such  until  re- 
lieved in  January,  1861,  by  Henry  S.  Lane, 
who  a  few  days  later  was  succeeded  by 
Oliver  P.  Morton. 

[Chapter  XXVIL] 



HATEVER  personal  views  may 
have  been  entertained  by  men 
affiliated  with  the  Democratic 
party  during  the  tumultuous 
agitation  of  the  slavery  ques- 
tion, there  can  be  no  question 
as  to  the  historic  attitude  of  the 
party  with  reference  to  the  indestructibil- 
ity of  the  American  Union.  In  other 
words,  the  right  of  a  State  to  nullify  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  or  to  secede 
from  the  Union  has  ever  been  stoutly  de- 
nied by  the  illustrious  statesmen  who  have 
been  recognized  and  venerated  as  expound- 
ers of  Democratic  principles.  Within  this 
category  come  such  men  as  Jefferson, 
Madison,  Jackson,  Van  Buren,  Tilden, 
Douglas  and  Cass. 

Unreserved  approval  was  accorded  at 
the  beginning  of  the  struggle  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  Federal  Union  to  this  dec- 
laration, formulated  by  Senator  Andrew 
Johnson  of  Tennessee  and  formally 
adopted  by  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
on  the  24th  day  of  July,  1861 : 

"Resolved,  That  the  present  deplorable 
Civil  War  has  been  forced  upon  the  coun- 
try by  the  disunionists  of  the  Southern 
States  now  in  revolt  against  the  Constitu- 
tional Government  and  in  arms  around  the 
Capitol;  that  in  this  national  emergency 
Congress,  banishing  all  feeling  of  mere 
passion  or  resentment,  will  recollect  only 
its  duty  to  the  whole  country;  that  this 
war  is  not  prosecuted  on  our  part  in  any 
spirit  of  oppression,  nor  for  any  purpose 
of  conquest  or  subjugation,  nor  for  the 
purpose  of  antagonizing  or  interfering 
with  the  rights  of  established  institutions 
of  those  States,  but  to  defend  and  main- 
tain the  supremacy  of  the  Constitution 
and  all  laws  made  in  pursuance  thereof, 
and  to  preserve  the  Union    with    all    the 

dignity,  equality  and  rights  of  the  States 
unimpaired ;  that  as  soon  as  these  objects 
are  accomplished  the  war  ought  to  cease." 
If  any  one  man  may  have  been  consid- 
ered authorized  to  speak  for  his  party  at 
that  critical  period  in  our  country's  history, 
that  man  was  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  the 
chosen  leader  and  gallant  standard-bearer 
in  the  memorable  campaign  of  1860.  When 
it  had  become  apparent  that  war  between 
North  and  South  was  inevitable.  Senator 
Douglas  left  Washington  to  deliver  a  series 
of  public  addresses  on  his  way  to  Chicago. 
Accompanied  by  his  charming  wife,  he 
spoke  in  several  of  the  more  important 
cities  along  his  route,  including  Indiana- 
polis. Reaching  his  home  city,  Chicago, 
for  the  upbuilding  of  which  he  had  done  so 
much,  he  was  met  at  the  depot  by  an  im- 
mense assemblage  of  citizens  of  all  parties, 
who  insisted  on  escorting  him  in 
procession  to  the  great  Wigwam  which 
had  already  been  packed  by  an  audi- 
ence of  fully  ten  thousand  eager  hear- 
ers. It  was  there  on  a  beautiful  May  day 
(the  first)  where  the  "Little  Giant"  de- 
livered his  last  speech,  for  soon  after  its 
delivery  he  was  attacked  with  an  acute 
disease  from  which  he  died  on  the  morning 
of  June  4,  1861,  shortly  after  the  comple- 
tion of  his  forty-eighth  year.  His  last 
words  were:  "Tell  Stevie  and  Robbie 
(his  sons)  to  obey  the  laws  and  support 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States." 


"Mr.  Chairman — I  thank  you  for  the 
kind  terms  in  which  you  have  been  pleased 
to  welcome  me.  I  thank  the  committee 
and  citizens  of  Chicago  for  this  grand  and 


1  6 

imposing  reception.  I  beg  you  to  believe 
that  I  will  not  do  you  nor  myself  the  in- 
justice to  believe  this  magnificent  ovation 
is  personal  homage  to  myself.  I  rejoice 
to  know  that  it  expresses  your  devotion 
to  the  Constitution,  the  Union,  and  the 
flag  of  our  country.     (Cheers.) 

"I  will  not  conceal  gratification  at  the 
uncontrovertible  test  this  vast  audience 
presents — that  what  political  difi'erences 
or  party  questions  may  have  divided  us, 
yet  you  all  had  a  conviction  that  when  the 
country  should  be  in  danger,  my  loyalty 
could  be  relied  on.  That  the  present  dan- 
ger is  imminent,  no  man  can  conceal.  If 
war  must  come — if  the  bayonet  must  be 
used  to  maintain  the  Constitution — I  can 
say  before  God  my  conscience  is  clean.  I 
have  struggled  long  for  a  peaceful  solu- 
tion of  the  difficulty.  I  have  not  only 
tendered  those  States  what  was  theirs  of 
right,  but  I  have  gone  to  the  very  extreme 
of  magnanimity. 

"The  return  we  receive  is  war,  armies 
marched  upon  our  capital,  obstructions 
and  dangers  to  our  navigation,  letters  of 
marque  to  invite  pirates  to  prey  upon  our 
commerce,  a  concerted  movement  to  blot 
out  the  United  States  of  America  from  the 
map  of  the  globe.  The  question  is.  Are 
we  to  maintain  the  country  of  our  fathers, 
or  allow  it  to  be  stricken  down  by  those 
who,  when  they  can  no  longer  govern, 
threaten  to  destroy? 

"What  cause,  what  excuse  do  disunion- 
ists  give  us  for  breaking  up  the  best  Gov- 
ernment on  which  the  sun  of  heaven  ever 
shed  its  rays?  They  are  dissatisfied  with 
the  result  of  a  Presidential  election.  Did 
they  never  get  beaten  before?  Are  we  to 
resort  to  the  sword  when  we  get  defeated 
at  the  ballot-box?  I  understand  it  that  the 
voice  of  the  people  expressed  in  the  mode 
appointed  by  the  Constitution  must  com- 
mand the  obedience  of  every  citizen.  They 
assume,  on  the  election  of  a  particular 
candidate,  that  their  rights  are  not  safe  in 
the  Union.  What  evidence  do  they  present 
of  this?  I  defy  any  man  to  show  any  act 
on  which  it  is  based.  What  act  has  been 
omitted  to  be  done?  I  appeal  to  these  as- 
sembled thousands  that  so  far  as  the 
constitutional  rights  of  the  Southern 
States — I  will  say  the  constitutional  rights 
of  slaveholders — are  concerned,  nothing 
has  been  done,  and  nothing  omitted,  of 
which  they  can  complain. 

"There  has  never  been  a  time  from  the 

day  that  Washington  was  inaugurated 
first  President  of  these  United  States, 
when  the  rights  of  the  Southern  States 
stood  firmer  under  the  laws  of  the  land 
than  they  do  now ;  there  never  was  a  time 
when  they  had  not  as  good  a  cause  for 
disunion  as  they  have  today.  What  good 
cause  have  they  now  that  has  not  existed 
under  every  administration? 

"If  they  say  the  Territorial  question — 
now,  for  the  first  time,  there  is  no  act  of 
Congress  prohibiting  slavery  anywhere. 
If  it  be  the  non-enforcement  of  the  laws, 
the  only  complaints  that  I  have  heard  have 
been  of  the  too  vigorous  and  faithful  ful- 
filment of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law.  Then 
what  reason  have  they? 

"The  slavery  question  is  a  mere  excuse. 
The  election  of  Lincoln  is  a  mere  pretext. 
The  present  secession  movement  is  the  re- 
sult of  an  enormous  conspiracy  formed 
more  than  a  year  since,  formed  by  leaders 
in  the  Southern  Confederacy  more  than 
twelve  months  ago. 

"They  use  the  slavery  question  as  a 
means  to  aid  the  accomplishment  of  their 
ends.  They  desired  the  election  of  a 
Northern  candidate,  by  a  sectional  vote,  in 
order  to  show  that  the  two  sections  cannot 
live  together.  When  the  history  of  the  two 
years  from  the  Lecompton  charter  down 
to  the  Presidential  election  shall  be  writ- 
ten, it  will  be  shown  that  the  scheme  was 
deliberately  made  to  break  up  this  Union. 

"They  desired  a  Northern  Republican  to 
be  elected  by  a  purely  Northern  vote,  and 
then  assign  this  fact  as  a  reason  why  the 
sections  may  not  longer  live  together.  If 
the  disunion  candidate  in  the  late  Presi- 
dential contest  had  carried  the  united 
South,  their  scheme  was,  the  Northern 
candidate  successful,  to  seize  the  Capitol 
last  spring,  and  by  a  united  South  and 
divided  North,  hold  it.  That  scheme  was 
defeated  in  the  defeat  of  the  disunion  can- 
didate in  several  of  the  Southern  States. 

"But  this  is  no  time  for  a  detail  of 
causes.  The  conspiracy  is  now  known. 
Armies  have  been  raised,  war  is  levied  to 
accomplish  it.  There  are  only  two  sides  to 
the  question.  Every  man  must  be  for  the 
United  States  or  against  it.  There  can  be 
no  neutrals  in  this  war;  only  patriots — or 

"Thank  God,  Illinois  is  not  divided  on 
this  question.  (Cheers.)  I  know  they  ex- 
pected to  present  a  united  South  against  a 
divided  North.    They  hoped,  in  the  North- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

em  States,  party  questions  would  bring 
civil  war  between  Democrats  and  Repub- 
licans, when  the  South  would  step  in  with 
her  cohorts,  aid  one  party  to  conquer  the 
other,  and  then  make  easy  prey  of  the  vic- 
tors. Their  scheme  was  carnage  and  civil 
war  in  the  North. 

"There  is  but  one  way  to  defeat  this.  In 
Illinois  it  is  being  so  defeated  by  closing 
up  the  ranks.  War  will  thus  be  prevented 
on  our  own  soil.  While  there  was  a  hope 
of  peace,  I  was  ready  for  any  reasonable 
sacrifice  or  compromise  to  maintain  it. 
But  when  the  question  comes  of  war  in  the 
cotton  fields  of  the  South  or  the  corn  fields 
of  Illinois,  I  say  the  farther  off  the  better. 

"We  cannot  close  our  eyes  to  the  sad  and 
solemn  fact  that  war  does  exist.  The  Gov- 
ernment must  be  maintained,  its  enemies 
overthrown,  and  the  more  stupendous  our 
preparations  the  less  the  bloodshed,  and 
the  shorter  the  struggle.  But  we  must  re- 
member certain  restraints  on  our  actions 
even  in  time  of  war.  We  are  a  Christian 
people,  and  the  war  must  be  prosecuted  in 
a  manner  recognized  by  Christian  nations. 

"We  must  not  invade  Constitutional 
rights.  The  innocent  must  not  suffer,  nor 
women  and  children  be  the  victims.  Sav- 
ages must  not  be  let  loose.  But  while  I 
sanction  no  war  on  the  rights  of  others,  I 
will  implore  my  countrymen  not  to  lay 
down  their  arms  until  our  own  rights  are 
recognized.     (Cheers.) 

"The  Constitution  and  its  guarantees 
are  our  birthright,  and  I  am  ready  to  en- 
force that  inalienable  right  to  the  last  ex- 
tent. We  cannot  recognize  secession. 
Recognize  it  once  and  you  have  not  only 
dissolved  government,  but  you  have  de- 
stroyed social  order,  upturned  the  founda- 
tions of  society.  You  have  inaugurated 
anarchy  in  its  worst  form,  and  will  shortly 
experience  all  the  horrors  of  the  French 

"Then  we  have  a  solemn  duty — to  main- 
tain the  Government.  The  greater  our 
unanimity  the  speedier  the  day  of  peace. 
We  have  prejudices  to  overcome  from  the 
few  short  months  since  of  a  fierce  party 
contest.  Yet  these  must  be  allayed.  Let 
us  lay  aside  all  criminations  and  recrimina- 
tions as  to  the  origin  of  these  difficulties. 
When  we  shall  have  again  a  country  with 
the  United  States  flag  floating  over  it,  and 
respected  on  every  inch  of  American  soil, 
it  will  then  be  time  enough  to  ask  who  and 
what  brought  all  this  upon  us. 

"I  have  said  more  than  I  intended  to  say. 
(Cries  of  'Go  on.')  It  is  a  sad  task  to  dis- 
cuss questions  so  fearful  as  civil  war;  but 
sad  as  it  is,  bloody  and  disastrous  as  I 
expect  it  will  be,  I  express  it  as  my  convic- 
tion before  God  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
American  citizen  to  rally  round  the  flag  of 
his  country. 

"I  thank  you  again  for  this  magnificent 
demonstration.  By  it  you  show  you  have 
laid  aside  party  strife.  Illinois  has  a  proud 
position — united,  firm,  determined  never 
to  permit  the  Government  to  be  destroyed." 
(Prolonged  cheering.) 


When  the  Democrats  met  in  State  Con- 
vention at  Indianapolis,  January  8,  there 
were  but  few  among  the  most  sagacious 
delegates  who  believed  it  to  be  possible  to 
carry  the  State  at  the  October  election. 
Two  days  were  devoted  to  transacting  the 
business  for  which  the  convention  had 
been  called.  The  first  day's  session  was 
chiefly  devoted  to  the  discussion  of  a  mo- 
tion offered  by  ex-Congressman  Wm.  H. 
English  that  an  adjournment  be  taken 
until  July  4,  which  motion  was  warmly 
seconded  by  Cyrus  L.  Dunham.  The  prop- 
osition was  vigorously  opposed  and  was 
voted  down.  This  was  followed  by  a 
wrangle  over  the  election  of  a  permanent 
chairman.  Joseph  W.  Chapman  had  been 
chosen  temporary  chairman.  Grafton  F. 
Cookerly  of  Terre  Haute  proposed 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks  for  the  permanent 
chairmanship.  Congressman  John  G. 
Davis  of  Parke  and  Robert  D.  Walpole 
of  Indianapolis  were  also  put  in  nomina- 
tion. Walpole's  name  was  withdrawn, 
whereupon  Joseph  E.  McDonald  in  a  verj^ 
tactful  speech  moved  that  Mr.  Hendricks 
be  chosen  by  acclamation  to  preside  over 
the  convention.  This  motion  prevailed. 
Upon  taking  the  chair  Mr.  Hendricks  de- 
livered an  unusually  lengthy  address. 
Among  other  points  made  by  him  were 
these : 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

"The  civil  war  is  upon  us.  For  its  exist- 
ence the  Democratic  party  is  not  responsi- 
ble. For  many  years  we  have  admonished 
those  who  favored  a  sectional  party  of  its 
danger — in  the  sentiment  of  Washington's 
farewell  address  that  the  greatest  danger 
to  our  country  was  the  formation  of  geo- 
graphical parties  —  we  have  advocated 
'those  doctrines  which  we  believed  fair 
and  equal  to  all  sections;  a  change  could 
have  been  adopted  without  wounding  the 
pride  or  stimulating  the  arrogance  of 
either.'  Our  appeals  were  disregarded. 
Sectional  pride,  prejudice  and  hatred  in 
one  section  produced  the  same  sentiments 
in  the  other,  and  of  this  sectional  strife 
was  begotten  our  present  troubles.  The 
war  is  upon  us — 'wickedly  provoked  on  the 
one  side,  and  in  folly  and  sin  and  without 
sufficient  cause  commenced  on  the  other.' 
With  secession  upon  the  one  hand  and  sec- 
tional interference  with  Southern  rights 
upon  the  other,  we  hold  no  sympathy.  Our 
most  earnest  desire  is  for  the  restoration 
of  the  Union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Consti- 
tution, and  for  myself  I  will  give  an  honest 
support  to  all  Constitutional  and  proper 
measures  adopted  by  the  administration  to 
that  end;  and  I  will  as  earnestly  oppose 
all  acts  in  violation  of  the  Constitution  and 
in  suppression  of  liberty  because  of  my 
veneration  for  that  solemn  compact  of  our 
fathers,  and  because  such  policy  renders 
the  Union  impossible;  by  obliterating  the 
Union  sentiment  of  the  South  and  giving 
aid  and  comfort  to  its  enemies." 

At  the  conclusion  of  Mr.  Hendricks'  ad- 
dress Joseph  J.  Bingham  was  made  per- 
manent secretary,  with  R.  S.  Hastings  of 
Lafayette  as  assistant. 

Mr.  Cookerly  moved  that  each  Congres- 
sional district  name  a  vice-president  of 
the  convention.  Judge  Pettit  opposed  this 
motion,  saying  that  there  was  no  neces- 
sity for  naming  vice-presidents.  Mr. 
Cookerly  replied  that  the  custom  of  thus 
selecting  vice-presidents  had  prevailed 
for  years,  and  he  knew  of  no  good  reason 
why  this  time-honored  practice  should 
not  be  continued.  The  convention,  how- 
ever, coincided  in  the  view  of  Judge  Pettit 
and  defeated  the  motion  for  the  selection 
of  vice-presidents. 


1.  James  D.  Williams,  Knox  county. 

2.  Michael  C.  Kerr,  Floyd. 

3.  M.  W.  Shields,  Jackson. 

4.  George  Hibben,  Rush. 

5.  Edmund  Johnson,  Henry. 

6.  J.  J.  Bingham,  George  McQuat,  Marion. 

7.  Thomas  Dowling,  Vigo. 

8.  R.  S.  Hastings,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  J.  A.  Taylor,  Cass. 

10.  S.  W.  Sprott,  Dekalb. 

11.  J.  R.  Coffroth,  Huntington. 


Seventeen  planks  were  put  into  the  plat- 
form, as  agreed  upon  by  the  committee 
on  resolutions.  The  platform  in  its  en- 
tirety was  objectionable  to  a  goodly  num- 
ber of  Democrats,  chief  among  whom  were 
Gov.  Joseph  A.  Wright,  Wm.  H.  English, 
Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  James  Hughes,  Henry 
Seebirt,  Judge  David  S.  Gooding,  Col.  W. 
A.  Bickle,  Judge  A.  C.  Downey,  Gen.  Ebe- 
nezer  Dumont,  Gen.  Lew  Wallace,  Col. 
John  T.  Wilder,  Charles  W.  Cathcart, 
Robert  Dale  Owen,  Gen.  Alvin  P.  Hovey, 
James  M.  Gregg,  Col.  Norman  Eddy,  An- 
drew Jackson  and  J.  B.  Fulwiler.  The  main 
points  of  the  platform  are  set  forth  in  the 
planks  herewith  reproduced : 

"That  we  are  unalterably  attached  to 
the  Constitution,  by  which  the  Union  of 
these  States  was  formed  and  established, 
and  that  a  faithful  observance  of  its  prin- 
ciples can  alone  continue  the  existence  of 
the  Union,  and  the  permanent  happiness 
of  the  people. 

"That  the  present  civil  war  has  mainly 
resulted  from  the  long  continued,  unwise 
and  fanatical  agitation  in  the  North  of  the 
question  of  domestic  slavery,  the  conse- 
quent organization  of  a  geographical  party, 
guided  by  the  sectional  platforms  adopted 
at  Buffalo,  Pittsburgh,  Philadelphia  and 
Chicago,  and  the  development  thereby  of 
sectional  hate  and  jealousy,  producing  (as 
has  long  been  foreseen  and  predicted  by 
us)  its  counterpart  in  the  South  of  seces- 
sion, disunion  and  armed  resistance  to  the 
General  Government,  and  terminating  in 
a  bloody  strife  between  those  who  should 
have  been  forever  bound  together  by  fra- 
ternal bonds,  thus  bringing  upon  the  whole 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-191 

country  a  calamity  which  we  are  now  to 
meet  as  loyal  citizens,  striving  for  the 
adoption  of  that  mode  of  settlement  best 
calculated  to  again  restore  union  and 

"That  in  rejecting  all  propositions  likely 
to  result  in  a  satisfactory  adjustment  of 
the  matters  in  dispute  between  the  North 
and  the  South,  and  especially  those  meas- 
ures which  would  have  secured  the  border 
slave  States  to  the  Union,  and  a  hearty  co- 
operation on  their  part  in  all  constitutional 
and  legal  measures  to  procure  a  return  of 
the  more  Southern  States  to  their  al- 
legiance, the  Republican  party  assumed  a 
fearful  responsibility  and  acted  in  total 
disregard  of  the  best  interests  of  the  whole 

"That  if  the  party  in  power  had  shown 
the  same  desii'e  to  settle,  by  amicable  ad- 
justment, our  internal  dissensions  before 
hostilities  had  actually  commenced,  that 
the  administration  has  recently  exhibited 
to  avoid  war  with  our  ancient  enemy,  Great 
Britain,  we  confidently  believe  that  peace 
and  harmony  would  now  reign  throughout 
all  our  borders. 

"That  the  maintenance  of  the  Union 
upon  the  principles  of  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution should  be  the  controlling  object  of 
all  who  profess  loyalty  to  the  Government, 
and  in  our  judgment  this  purpose  can  only 
be  accompiished  by  the  ascendancy  of  a 
Union  party  in  the  Southern  States,  which 
shall,  by  a  counter  revolution,  displace 
those  who  control  and  direct  the  present 
rebellion.  That  no  effort  to  create  or  sus- 
tain such  a  party  can  be  successful  which 
is  not  based  upon  a  definite  settlement  of 
the  question  at  issue  between  the  two  sec- 
tions ;  and  we  therefore  demand  that  some 
such  settlement  be  made  by  additional  con- 
stitutional guarantee,  either  initiated  by 
act  of  Congress  or  through  the  medium  of 
a  National  convention. 

"That  the  Republican  party  has  fully 
demonstrated  its  inability  to  conduct  the 
Government  through  its  present  difficul- 

"That  we  are  utterly  opposed  to  the  twin 
heresies.  Northern  sectionalism  and  South- 
ern secession,  as  inimical  to  the  Constitu- 
tion; and  that  freemen,  as  they  value  the 
boon  of  civil  liberty  and  the  peace  of  the 
country,  should  frown  indignantly  upon 

"That  in  this  national  emergency  the 
Democracy  of  Indiana,  banishing  all  feeling 

of  passion  and  resentment,  will  recollect 
only  their  duty  to  the  whole  country ;  that 
this  war  should  not  be  waged  in  the  spirit 
of  conquest  or  subjugation,  nor  for  the 
purpose  of  overthrowing  or  interfering 
with  the  rights  or  institutions  of  the 
States,  but  to  defend  and  maintain  the 
supremacy  of  the  Constitution,  and  to  pre- 
serve the  Union  with  all  the  dignity,  equal- 
ity and  rights  of  the  several  States  unim- 
paired, and  that  as  soon  as  these  objects 
are  accomplished  the  war  ought  to  cease. 

"That  we  will  sustain,  with  all  our  ener- 
gies, a  war  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Con- 
stitution, and  of  the  integrity  of  the  Union 
under  the  Constitution ;  but  we  are  opposed 
to  a  war  for  the  emancipation  of  the 
negroes  or  the  subjugation  of  the  Southei-n 

"That  the  purposes  avowed  and  advo- 
cated by  the  Northern  disunionists,  to  lib- 
erate and  arm  the  negro  slaves,  is  uncon- 
stitutional, insulting  to  loyal  citizens,  a  dis- 
grace to  the  age,  is  calculated  to  retard  the 
suppression  of  the  rebellion  and  meets  our 
unqualified  condemnation. 

"That  the  disclosures  made  by  the  in- 
vestigating committee  in  Congress  of  the 
enormous  frauds  that  have  stalked  into  the 
army  and  navy  departments,  implicating 
the  heads  of  those  departments  in  a  con- 
nivance at,  if  not  an  actual  participation 
in,  a  system  of  corruption,  and  in  which 
our  brave  soldiers  have  been  defrauded  of 
their  proper  supplies,  and  our  Government 
threatened  with  bankruptcy,  demands  a 
thorough  investigation  into  all  our  expendi- 
tures, both  State  and  National,  and  that 
a  speedy  and  marked  example  be  made  of 
all  such  'birds  of  prey,'  who,  taking  ad- 
vantage of  the  necessities  of  our  country, 
have  fed  and  fattened  upon  public  plunder. 

"That  the  meritorious  conduct  of  the 
Indiana  troops,  in  every  battlefield  where 
the  victory  has  perched  upon  the  national 
banner,  has  filled  the  people  of  this  State 
with  the  highest  gratitude  to  her  gallant 
sons,  and  that  we  send  our  best  wishes  to 
officers  and  men,  dispersed  throughout  the 
country,  and  the  heartfelt  greetings  gf 
every  Democrat  for  their  further  brilliant 
achievements  in  the  coming  contests  for 
the  maintenance  of  the  Constitution  and 
the  Union." 

There    was    considerable    doubt    about 
Oscar  B.  Hord's  willingness  to  again  make 



-  1 

the  race  for  Attorney-General.  But  he 
graciously  yielded  to  the  pressure  brought 
upon  him  to  accept.  The  ticket  finally 
agreed  upon  consisted  of  these  widely- 
known  gentlemen:  Dr.  J.  S.  Athon  for 
Secretary  of  State,  Joseph  Ristine  for 
Auditor,  Matthew  L.  Brett  for  Treasurer, 
Oscar  B.  Hord  for  Attorney-General, 
Samuel  L.  Rugg  for  Superintendent  of 
Public  Instruction,  and  Michael  C.  Kerr  for 
Reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court. 


The  dissatisfaction  over  some  of  the 
planks  in  the  platform  adopted  at  the 
January  convention  seems  to  have  been 
sufficiently  pronounced  to  have  made  it 
clear  that  the  calling  of  another  conven- 
tion had  become  expedient,  if  not  abso- 
lutely necessary.  This  was  done.  A  mass 
convention  was  provided  for.  July  30 
was  the  date  fixed  therefor.  The  State- 
house  grove  was  chosen  as  the  place  for 
holding  the  meeting.  Democrats  came 
from  all  over  the  State,  on  foot,  by  trains, 
wagons  and  carriages.  It  was  estimated 
that  from  forty  to  fifty  thousand  were 
present.  Col.  Thomas  Dowling  of  Terre 
Haute  called  the  convention  to  order  and 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks  was  chosen  Presi- 
dent by  acclamation.  In  part  Mr.  Hen- 
dricks said: 

"We  are  surrounded  by  troubles.  Our 
society  is  in  an  excited  condition;  and  it 
is  the  duty  of  every  man ;  it  is  the  duty  of 
every  good  citizen ;  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
good  patriot,  to  maintain  the  public  peace: 
and,  as  the  presiding  officer  of  this  meet- 
ing, I  make  my  appeal  to  every  man  that 
he  consider  himself  a  committee  to  main- 
tain good  order  on  this  occasion.  Gentle- 
men, no  man  is  a  good  Democrat  unless  he 
is  a  good  citizen  and  a  patriot.  If  that  be 
true,  every  Democrat,  from  his  heart,  will 
endeavor  to  preserve  the  utmost  good  order 
on  this  occasion." 

Joseph  J.  Bingham,  editor  of  the  Senti- 
nel, was  designated  to  serve  as  secretary. 


Chairman  Hendricks  was  authorized  to 
name  as  members  of  the  committee  on 
resolutions  eleven  representative  Demo- 
crats, one  from  each  Congressional  dis- 
trict. This  committee  was  composed  of 
these  distinguished  representative  Dem- 
ocrats: James  D.  Williams,  John  B. 
Winstanley,  Samuel  H.  Buskirk,  Major 
Anderigg,  Lafe  Develin,  Judge  S.  E.  Per- 
kins, Judge  Wm.  M.  Franklin,  E.  F.  Lucas, 
P.  M.  Kent,  Samuel  W.  Sprott  and  John 
R.  Coffroth. 

The  committee's  report  appears  to  have 
met  with  general  approval.  It  contained 
these  declarations,  which  were  enthusiast- 
ically adopted  by  unanimous  vote: 

"1.  That  we  adhere  to  the  time-honored 
principles  of  the  Democratic  party,  and 
we  believe  that  the  only  hope  for  the 
restoration  of  the  Union  and  the  main- 
tenance of  the  Constitution  is  in  the 
restoration  of  that  truly  conservative 
party  in  power. 

"2.  That  this  convention  endorse  as 
worthy  of  all  confidence  the  persons  nom- 
inated by  the  delegate  convention  which 
assembled  at  Indianapolis  on  the  8th  of 
January,  1862,  and  that  we  recommend 
them  to  the  people  as  honest,  capable  and 
faithful  to  the  Constitution. 

"3.  That  the  Constitution,  the  American 
Union  and  the  laws  made  under  and  by  the 
authority  of  the  Constitution  must  be  pre- 
served and  maintained  in  their  power  and 
rightful  supremacy — that  the  rebellion 
now  in  arms  against  them  must  be  sup- 
pressed and  put  down,  and  that  it  is  the 
duty  of  all  good  citizens  to  aid  the  General 
Government  in  all  measures  necessary  and 
proper  to  that  end. 

"4.  That  the  Democracy  of  Indiana  with 
patriots  everywhere  have  made  and  will 
continue  to  make  every  sacrifice  to  the  end 
that  the  rebellion  may  be  suppressed  and 
the  supremacy  of  the  Constitution  main- 
tained and  the  Union  under  it  preserved, 
but  they  are  unalterably  opposed  to  a  war 
of  conquest  or  subjugation,  and  they  will 
never  consent  that  the  war  on  their  part 
shall  be  waged  for  the  purpose  of  interfer- 
ing with  the  rights  or  overthrowing  the 
established  institutions  of  any  of  the 
States.    In  the  language  of  Senator  Doug- 

(202  ) 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DF:M0CRACY  —  1816-191G 

las,  uttered  at  Chicago  a  few  days  before 
his  death,  'We  must  not  invade  constitu- 
tional rights.  The  innocent  must  not  suf- 
fer nor  women  and  children  be  victims. 
Savages  must  not  be  let  loose.'  " 

The  speakers  for  this  great  outpouring 
of  Indiana  Democrats  were  C.  A.  Wickliffe 
of  Kentucky,  John  S.  Carlisle  of  Virginia, 
and  Senator  Wm.  A.  Richardson  of  Illi- 
nois, who  was  Stephen  A.  Douglas'  trusted 
manager  in  the  Charleston  and  Baltimore 
conventions  and  who,  by  reason  of  these 
intimate  relations  and  his  sterling  worth 
and  conceded  ability,  became  the  "Little 
Giant's"  immediate  successor  in  the  Sen- 
ate of  the  United  States. 


The  foregoing  resolutions  placed  the 
party  in  much  better  position  and  in  a 
far  more  favorable  light  than  it  had  been 
up  to  that  period.  At  the  same  time  there 
was  issued  by  authority  of  the  State 
Central  Committee  an  address  so  judi- 
ciously and  patriotically  worded  as  to  have 
produced  a  marked  change  in  public  sen- 
timent. The  demonstration  of  July  30 
and  the  spirited  address  promulgated  by 
Chairman  McQuat  made  it  possible  for 
the  Democratic  party  of  Indiana  to  appeal 
with  confidence  to  the  suffrages  of  the 
people.  The  way  was  thus  paved  for  vic- 
tory. The  mistakes  of  January  were  cor- 
i-ected  by  the  mighty  voice  of  a  patriot- 
ically aroused  Democracy.  This  vigorously 
written  document  is  well  worth  studious 
perusal,  even  though  more  than  a  half 
century  has  passed  since  it  was  given 
publicity : 
"To  the  People  of  Indiana  on  the  Crisis  of 

the  Country: 

"We  address  you  in  the  midst  of  a  crisis 
imminent  with  peril  to  the  institutions  of 
our  beloved  country.  In  doing  so,  we  cle- 
sire  to  discard  all  party  feelings,  and  ap- 
peal only  to  the  patriotic  impulses  of  our 
countrymen.  The  Nation  has  had  enough 
of  party  platforms  and  party  measures  to 
ruin  and  destroy  even  a  stronger  Govern- 

ment than  this,  founded,  as  we  have  been 
taught  to  believe  it  was,  on  the  affections 
and  consent  of  the  people.  Let  us  discard 
the  platforms  of  party,  and  party  itself, 
except  so  far  as  they  are  consistent  with 
the  preservation  of  the  Union  and  the 
Constitution  which  makes  us  a  Nation.  If 
there  be  a  sentiment  in  the  creed  of  the 
Democratic  organization,  enunciated  now 
or  heretofore,  which  makes  against  the 
restoration  of  the  UNION  AS  IT  WAS,  and 
the  return  of  peace,  we  lay  that  sentiment 
and  creed  upon  the  altar  of  our  beloved 
country  and  abandon  it  forever.  There  is 
no  party  platform,  whether  made  at  Balti- 
more or  Chicago,  'which  is  a  law  with  us,' 
and  we  deem  no  man,  no  Congress,  no 
executive,  a  safe  counselor  who  adhei-es  to 
the  single  idea  of  a  party  in  perilous  times 
like  these.  We  give  all  such  consideration 
to  the  winds  and  regard  them  with  ab- 
horrence. They  shall  have  no  place  in  our 
affections,  and  no  sympathy  in  our  hearts. 
Acting  upon  these  convictions,  we  repudi- 
ate for  ourselves  and  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  of  Indiana  all  and  every  party  feel- 
ing, prejudice  or  opinion  which  shall  come 
in  conflict  with  the  putting  down  of  this 
rebellion,  the  return  of  peace  and  the  com- 
plete restoration  of  the  American  Union 
in  all  its  purity  and  vigor. 

"Sixty-six  years  ago,  Washington,  in  his 
farewell  address,  gave  to  his  countrymen 
this  advice  and  solemn  warning:  'In  con- 
templating the  causes  which  may  distract 
our  Union,  it  occurs,  as  a  matter  of  serious 
concern,  that  any  ground  should  have  been 
furnished  for  characterizing  parties  by 
geographical  discriminations — Northern 
and  Southern,  Atlantic  and  Western — 
whence  designing  men  may  endeavor  to 
excite  a  belief  that  there  is  a  real  difference 
of  local  interests  and  views.  One  of  the 
expedients  of  party  to  acquire  influence 
within  particular  districts  is  to  misrepre- 
sent the  opinions  and  aims  of  other  dis- 
tricts. You  cannot  shield  yourselves  too 
much  against  the  jealousies  and  heart- 
burnings which  spring  from  these  misrep- 
resentations. They  tend  to  render  alien  to 
each  other  those  who  ought  to  be  bound 
together  by  fraternal  affection.' 

"Need  we  say  to  the  people  of  Indiana 
that  the  unwise  disregard  of  this  advice 
has  been  the  immediate  cause  of  the  pres- 
ent deplorable  civil  war?  The  far-seeing 
wisdom  of  'the  Father  of  his  Country'  was 
never  more  vindicated  than  in  that  portion 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-191 

of  his  matchless  address  to  his  country- 
men. He  foresaw  that  the  restless  spirit 
of  faction  and  the  disturbing  elements  of 
sectional  strife  would  be  used  to  plant  dis- 
cord between  the  people  of  various  States. 
Though  that  sainted  patriot  did  not  live 
to  witness  the  wild  fanaticism  of  his  coun- 
trymen, his  immediate  successors  in  the 
Presidential  chair  were  not  so  happy.  The 
initiation  of  active  agitation  on  the  slavery 
question  began  as  early  as  1812,  on  the 
breaking  out  of  the  war  with  Great 
Britain,  was  continued  or  revived  in  1819 
on  the  admission  of  Missouri,  and  from 
that  period,  with  slight  intermissions,  it 
has  been  more  or  less  thrust  before  the 
country,  in  some  shape,  befitting  the  views 
of  the  factions  which  grasped  at  it  for  their 
advancement  to  power.  We  have  seen  its 
effects  in  its  dark  progress  to  its  present 
perilous  heights.  We  have  no  desire  to 
trace  the  slimy  track  of  this  agitation,  and 
are  content  to  remind  our  fellow-citizens 
that  prudent  men  have  been  always  dis- 
posed to  leave  the  question  of  slavery 
where  the  Constitution  left  it — in  the 
hands  and  in  the  keeping  of  those  States 
(old  or  new)  which  admitted  it  as  a  part 
of  their  domestic  policy.  We  assert  no 
right  over  it.  Having  rejected  slavery  for 
Indiana  as  a  matter  of  choice,  her  people 
claim  no  power  to  force  it  in  or  out  of  her 
sister  States,  leaving  them  to  be  the  judge 
of  what  befits  their  local  condition.  This 
has  been  the  doctrine  of  the  Democratic 
party — it  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Whig 
party.  It  was  the  declared  principle  of 
Clay,  Cass,  Webster,  Jackson,  and  that 
host  of  wise  and  conservative  statesmen 
which  reflected  dignity  and  honor  upon 
the  American  name.  To  stand  by  the  doc- 
trines of  Washington  and  his  successors, 
we  must  be  consistently  Union  men  and 
avoid  those  snares  of  party  and  those  de- 
vices of  sectional  agitation  which  render 
us  'alien  to  each  other,'  and  thus  destroy 
the  goveriim.ent  whiph  makes  us  one  peo- 
ple. We  can  use  no  better  and  more  forci- 
ble language  than  that  employed  by  the 
seventh  President  of  the  United  States, 
when  about  leaving  the  cares  of  State,  in  a 
farewell  address  to  his  countrymen.  It 
declares  the  whole  duty  of  a  true  Ameri- 
can citizen.  General  Andrew  Jackson,  in 
that  address,  in  speaking  of  this  slavery 
agitation  and  its  effect  upon  the  United 
States,  declared: 

But  the  Constitution  cannot  be  maintained,  nor 
the  Union  preserved,  in  opposition  to  public  feel- 
ing, by  the  mere  exertion  of  coercive  powers  con- 
fided to  the  general  Government.  The  founda- 
tion must  be  laid  in  the  affections  of  the  people, 
in  the  security  which  it  gives  to  life,  liberty  and 
property  in  every  quarter  of  the  country,  and  in 
the  fraternal  attachments  which  the  citizens  of 
the  several  States  bear  to  one  another  as  members 
of  one  political  family,  mutually  contributing  to 
promote  the  happiness  of  each  other.  Hence  the 
citizens  of  each  State  should  studiously  avoid 
everything  calculated  to  wound  the  sensibility  or 
offend  the  just  pride  of  the  people  of  other  States; 
and  they  should  frown  upon  any  proceedings 
within  their  own  borders  likely  to  disturb  the  tran- 
quillity of  their  political  brethren  in  other  por- 
tions of  the  Union.  In  a  country  so  extensive  as 
the  United  States,  and  in  pursuits  so  varied,  the 
internal  regulations  of  the  several  States  must 
frequently  differ  from  one  another  in  important 
particulars;  and  this  difference  is  unavoidably  in- 
creased by  the  principles  upon  which  the  American 
Colonies  were  originally  planted — principles  which 
had  taken  deep  root  in  their  social  relations  be- 
fore the  Revolution,  and  therefore,  of  necessity, 
influencing  their  policy  since  they  became  free 
and  independent  States.  But  each  State  has  the 
unquestionable  right  to  regulate  its  own  internal 
concerns  according  to  its  own  pleasure;  and  while 
it  does  not  interfere  with  the  rights  of  the  people 
of  other  States,  or  the  rights  of  the  Union,  every 
State  must  be  the  sole  judge  of  the  measures 
proper  to  secure  the  safety  of  its  citizens  and 
promote  their  happiness:  and  in  all  efforts  on  the 
part  of  other  people  of  other  States  to  cast  odium 
upon  their  institutions,  and  on  all  measures  cal- 
culated to  disturb  their  rights  of  property,  or  to 
put  in  jeopardy  their  peace  and  internal  tran- 
quillity, are  in  direct  opposition  to  the  spirit  in 
which  the  Union  was  formed,  and  must  endanger 
its  safety.  Motives  of  philanthropy  may  be 
assigned  for  this  unwarrantable  interference,  and 
weak  men  may  persuade  themselves  for  a  moment 
that  they  are  laboring  in  the  cause  of  humanity 
and  asserting  the  rights  of  the  human  race;  but 
every  one,  upon  sober  reflection,  will  see  that 
nothing  but  mischief  can  come  from  these  im- 
proper assaults  upon  the  feelings  and  rights  of 
others.  Rest  assured  that  men  found  busy  in 
this  v}ork  of  discord  are  not  worthy  of  your  con- 
fidence and  deserve  your  strongest  reprobation. 

"This  was  the  language  of  a  man  who 
loved  his  country  as  he  did  his  own  life, 
and  who  periled  that  life  for  the  glory  and 
safety  of  his  native  land.  They  were  spok- 
en while  he  filled  the  most  exalted  office  in 
the  gift  of  his  countrymen,  and  just  before 
the  term  for  which  he  had  been  elected  ex- 
pired. These  words  come  to  us  as  from 
the  grave.  Their  author  reposes,  or  all 
that  was  mortal  of  him,  at  the  Hermitage, 
in  "Tennessee,  and  if  the  spirits  of  the  gal- 
lant dead  are  permitted  to  look  down  upon 
the  affairs  of  earth,  he  is  today  contem- 
plating the  ruin  and  desolation  which  the 
enemies  of  our  institutions  have  brought 
upon  his  beloved  country.     We  adopt  his 



1  6 

language  and  re-echo  his  warning  to  those 
who  love  the  Union  and  would  save  it  for 
their  children.  We  declare  before  heaven 
and  in  the  hearing  of  men  that  our  match- 
less Constitution  and  our  beloved  Union 
(in  spite  of  Secessionists,  Abolitionists  and 
other  powers  of  evil)  must  and  shall  be  pre- 
served." GEO.  McQUAT,  Chairman. 


As  the  foregoing  document  was  being 
read  and  studied,  chances  to  carry  the 
State  constantly  improved.  When  the  re- 
sult of  the  October  election  became  known 
it  was  found  that  the  Democrats  had  elect- 
ed their  entire  State  ticket  by  more  than 
9,000  majority,  had  carried  seven  of  the 
eleven  Congressional  districts,  and  se- 
cured the  election  of  a  Democratic  Leg- 
islature which  the  following  January 
chose  Thomas  A.  Hendricks  United  States 
Senator  for  the  long  (six  year)  term  and 
David  Turpie  for  the  short  term,  the  latter 
expiring  March  3,  1863.  Both  selections 
were  made  with  the  hearty  approval  of 
the  Indiana  Democracy. 

Indiana  was  by  no  means  the  only  State 
in  which  was  experienced  a  political  up- 
heaval. Popular  discontent  over  the  slow 
progress  made  in  subduing  the  rebellion 
had  become  so  pronounced  that  an  outlet 
had  to  be  found.  Somehow  the  impres- 
sion had  forced  itself  upon  the  public 
mind  that  a  political  upheaval  in  favor  of 
the  Democrats  would  be  interpreted  as  a 
declaration  in  favor  of  a  more  vigorous 
prosecution  of  the  war.  In  fact,  this  ar- 
gument was  freely  advanced  in  nearly 
every  State  where  campaigns  were  being 
vigorously  conducted.  I  heard  a  Repub- 
lican Congressman  of  Pennsylvania,  John 
C.  Kunkel,  of  the  Harrisburg  district,  say 
that  the  Republican  party  had  been  in 
power  so  short  a  time  and  had  so  little 
experience  in  Governmental  control  that 
he  believed  it  to  be  good  policy  to  turn 
the  management  of  affairs  over  to  the 
Democratic  party  with  its  many  years  of 
experience  in  governing.  Whatever  may 
have  influenced  the  public  mind,  the  elec- 

tion of  1862  resulted  in  a  sweeping  Dem- 
ocratic victory.  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois  and 
even  Iowa  rolled  up  majorities  for  the 
Democratic  tickets.  In  the  election  of 
members  of  Congress  the  Democrats  near- 
ly doubled  their  strength.  By  the  adop- 
tion of  a  conflicting  policy  the  following 
year,  when  C.  L.  Vallandigham  of  Ohio 
became  a  martyr  to  his  extreme  anti-war 
pronunciamentos,  and  extremists  in  other 
parts  of  the  country  did  their  utmost  to 
imitate  him,  the  gains  made  in  1862  were 
effectively  neutralized  and  rendered  nuga- 
tory. And  the  experience  of  1868  had 
quite  a  bearing  on  the  Presidential  elec- 
tion in  1864. 


The  aggregate  Unconditional  Union 
vote  in  1862  was  18,342  less  than  the  Re- 
publican vote  of  1860,  while  the  Union 
Democratic  vote  was  increased  by  1,163. 

FOR  1862. 

For  Secretary  of  State — James  S.  Athon,  Marion 

For  Auditor  of  State — Joseph  Ristine,  Fountain 

For  Treasurer  of  State — Matthew  L.  Brett, 
Daviess  county. 

For  Attorney  General — Oscar  B.  Hord,  Decatur 

For  Supreme  Court  Reporter — Michael  C.  Kerr, 
Floyd  county. 

For  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction — Sam- 
uel L.  Rugg,  Allen  county. 


For  Secretary  of  State — William  A.  Peelle. 
For  Auditor  of  State — Albert  Lange. 
For  Treasurer  of  State — Jonathan  S.  Harvey. 
For  Attorney-General — Delana   E.  Williamson. 
For   Superintendent  of   Public   Instruction — John 

I.  Morrison. 
For  Reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court — William  S. 


The  election  results  for  the  several  State 
officers  were  as  follows : 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

FOR  SECRETARY  OF  STATE.  had  written  a  letter  to  Jeff  Davis  recom- 
James  S.  Athon,  Democrat 127,977  9,591  mending  a  man  named  Lincoln  to  favor- 
William  A.  Peelle,  Republican 118,386  ^ble  Consideration  in  furnishing  arms  for 

FOR  TREASURER  OF  STATE.  use  in  the  Confederate  army.     Governor 

Matthew  L.  Brett,  Democrat 127,851    9,406  Morton  appointed  Gov.  Joseph  A.  Wright 

Jonathan  S.  Harvey,  Republican. .  .118,445  ^^    fju    ^j^g    yacancy    until    the    Legislature 

FOR  AUDITOR  OF  STATE.  could  make  an  election  for  the  remainder 

Jo.seph  Ristine,  Democrat 127,714    9,237  of   Bright's   term.   Wright  took   his   seat 

Albert  Lange,  Republican 118,477  ^yj^^^^j^   o^   jggg.      The  selection   of  Wright 

The    following   figures    show   how   the  was  partly  construed  as  a  non-political  act 

State  of  Indiana  voted  for  members   of  and  partly  as  a  compliment  to  the  war 

Congress  in  the  election  of  1862 :  Democrats,   of   whom   there   were   many. 

Plur.  The  Sentinel,  on  the  other  hand,  treated  it 

1st— John  Law,  Democrat 11,963    2,380  from  a  diiferent  standpoint.    At  first  that 

Alvah  Johnson,  Republican .  .     9,583  ^^^^^  ^^^^^^  disinclined  to  speak  in  harsh 

2nd-James  A.  Cravens,  Democrat  10,911     4,700  ^^  uncomplimentary  terms  of  the  appoint- 

Col.  Allen  May,  Republican. .     6,211  ,    ,     ^     ...        r^                   -iit-   ■    ,  j_  ,      , 

o  J    ti         w   tr      •     +       r.        iico^    ioQn  ment,  but  after  Govemor  Wright  had  sav- 

3rd — Henry  W.  Harrmgton,  Dem.  11,524     1,380  ,   '                       ,   ,,       r,.,       ,.   t 

Wm.  M.  Dunn,  Republican. .  10,144  ^gely  denounced  the  8th  of  January  plat- 

4th-Wm.  S.  Holman,  Democrat..  10,926    2,934  form  and  contemptuously  spat  upon  that 

Col.  James  Gavin,  Union...     7,992  document,  the  Sentinel  changed  its  atti- 

5th— Edmund  Johnson,  Democrat.     7,414  tude  and  poured  hot  shot  into  Governor 

George  W.  Julian,  Republican    9,272    1,858  Morton's  appointee.     Singular  as  it  may 

6th— Alexander  B.  Conduitt,  Dem.  11,654  appear,  the  St.  Louis  Globe-Democrat  also 

Ebenezer  Dumont,  Union...  12,525       871  seemed  to  be  displeased  over  Wright's  ap- 

7th— Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  Dem.. .  12,517    2,481  pointment.     Soon  after  taking  his  seat  in 

Harvey  D.  Scott,  Republican.  10,036  ^j^^   g^^^^^^^   y^^^^^  3^   ^^j^j^^   delivered  a 

8th-John  Pettit,  Democrat        ...    11,181  ^^^^     ^^     ^^^     question     of     abolishing 

Godlove  S.  Orth,  Republican.  12,00o        824  f              .      ^,       t^.  ;    .   ^      „  ^   ,        ,  .         m, 

,,,     ^     . ,  ^      .     ^                     ,,  .,„  slavery  m  the  District  of  Columbia.     Ihe 

9th— David  Turpie,  Democrat 14,546  ^,   ,     V                 _■              ,-      ,  t^ 

Schuyler  Colfax,  Republican.  14,775       229  Glohe-Democrat,  a  radical  Republican  ora- 

lOth-JosephK.  Edgerton,  Dem...  12,353       436  ^le,  was  greatly  displeased  over  Senator 

Wm.  Mitchell,  Republican...  11,977  Wright's   speech,   pronouncing   it   an   in- 

lith— Jas.  F.  McDowell,  Democrat.  13,142       923  tensely  pro-slavery  deliverance.    As  a  sort 

J.  P.  C.  Shanks,  Republican.  12,219  of  justification  for  its  conservatism  these 

By  way  of  explanation  it  may  be  stated  remarks  by  Senator  John  Sherman  were 

that  the  Republicans  in  this  campaign  la-  reproduced  in  an  Indiana  paper: 

beled  their  ticket   "Unconditional   Union  .j„  ^^^  g^^^^  ^^^^^  j  ^^^  (qj^j^)  ^^  ^^ 

Ticket,    while  the  Democrats  placed  their  not  like  negroes.    We  do  not  disguise  our 

nominees  under  the  heading  "Democratic  dislike.    As  my  friend  from  Indiana  (Mr. 

Union  Ticket."  Wright)  said  yesterday,  the  whole  people 

of  the  Northwestern  States  are,  for  rea- 
GOVERNOR  WRIGHT'S  APPOINTMENT  ?«"«  whether  correct  or  not,  opposed  to 
AS  TTNTTFD   STATF^;   csFMATnT?   TO  having  any  negroes  among  them ;  and  that 
Ab   UNI  1  ED  blAlES   SENATOR   TO  principle  or  preiudice  has  been  engrafted 
SUCCEED  JESSE  D.  BRIGHT.  ^n  the  legislation  of  nearly  all  the  North- 
February   5,    1862,   the   United    States  w^^*^™  States." 
Senate   voted   to   expel   Jesse   D.    Bright  This  doubtless  was  the  dominant  senti- 
from  his  seat  as  Senator  from  Indiana,  ment     of     that     period.       The     "colored 
The  ground  upon  which  this  drastic  ac-  brother"  was  for  years  in  bad  odor  in  the 
tion  was  taken  was  that  Senator  Bright  Hoosier  commonwealth. 


[Chapter  XXVIII.l 

McDonald  pitted  against  morton 


HE    election    of    a    Democratic 
Legislature  in  1862  caused  Gov. 

I  I  I  Oliver  P.  Morton  a  good  deal  of 
I  A  i  annoyance.  Imperious  by  na- 
I" "I  ture,  bent  on  carrying  into  ef- 
fect whatever  plans  he  might 
have  seen  fit  to  map  out,  and 
considering  himself  a  monarch  of  all  he 
surveyed,  it  would  have  been  miracu- 
lous if  trouble  with  a  politically  ad- 
verse Legislature  had  been  averted. 
The  points  in  controversy  during  those 
exciting  days  having  been  adjusted  in  one 
way  or  another,  and  having  no  particu- 
lar bearing  on  matters  concerning  or  in- 
teresting the  present  generation,  it  would 
be  neither  edifying  nor  instructive  to  de- 
vote much  space  to  a  recital  of  the  more 
or  less  exciting  episodes  of  that  period.  All 
the  participants  therein  have  passed  from 
life  to  eternity;  so  we  can  well  afford  to 
throw  the  broad  mantle  of  charity  over 
whatever  may  have  been  left  behind  as 
reminders  of  the  wordy  battles  fought  at 
Indianapolis  and  the  State  at  large  by 
Governor  Morton  and  his  followers  on 
one  side  and  his  opponents  on  the  other. 


For  Governor — Oliver  P.  Morton,  Indi- 

For  Lieutenant  -  Governor  —  Conrad 
Baker,  Evansville. 

For  Secretary  of  State — Nelson  Truss- 
ler,  Connersville. 

For  State  Auditor — Thomas  M.  McCar- 
ty,  Wabash. 

For  State  Treasurer — John  I.  Morrison, 

For  Attorney-General — Delana  E.  Wil- 
liamson, Greencastle. 

For  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruc- 
tion— Geo.  W.  Hoss,  Indianapolis. 

For  Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court — Laz- 
arus Noble,  Vincennes. 

For  Reporter  of  the  Supreme  Court — 
Benjamin  Harrison,  Indianapolis. 

For  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court — 
James  S.  Frazer,  Warsaw;  John  T.  Elliott, 
Henry  County;  Charles  A.  Ray,  Indian- 
apolis; Robert  C.  Gregory,  Lafayette. 

The  question  was  raised  as  to  whether 
Governor  Morton  was  eligible  to  re-elec- 
tion under  the  Constitution,  he  having 
filled  that  office  four  years,  less  three  days. 
It  was  held,  but  never  judicially,  that  the 
Constitutional  inhibition  did  not  apply  in 
his  case,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  he  was 
elected  in  1860  to  the  office  of  Lieutenant- 
Governor  and  became  acting  Governor 
upon  the  resignation  of  Governor  Henry 
S.  Lane  three  days  after  his  induction  in- 
to that  office  and  such  resignation  follow- 
ing Lane's  election  to  the  United  States 
Senate,  to  succeed  Dr.  Graham  N.  Fitch 
of  Logansport. 

the  democrats  place  joseph  e. 
McDonald  at  the  head  of 

THEIR  ticket. 

The  Democratic  State  convention  was 
held,  as  usual,  at  Indianapolis,  but  for  ob- 
vious reasons  not  as  early  as  had  for  years 
been  the  custom.  July  12  was  chosen  as 
a  more  fitting  time.  State  Chairman  Geo. 
McQuat  called  the  convention  to  order, 
and  Judge  David  Turpie  was  selected  as 
permanent  chairman.  A  ringing  speech 
was  delivered  as  this  man  of  extraordi- 
nary ability  took  charge  of  the  gavel. 

Joseph  E.  McDonald  was  nominated  for 
Governor  and  David  Turpie  for  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor. The  five  State  officers  tri- 
umphantly elected  in  1862 — Dr.  James  S. 
Athon,  Secretary  of  State ;  Joseph  Ristine, 
Auditor;    Matthew   L.   Brett,    Treasurer; 


19  16 

Oscar  B.  Hord,  Attorney-General,  and 
Samuel  L.  Rugg,  Superintendent  of  Public 
Instruction — were  honored  with  renomi- 
nations  without  opposition.  Ethelbert  C. 
Hibben,  of  Rushville,  was  nominated  for 
Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  for 
Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  Samuel  E. 
Perkins  of  Indianapolis,  Andrew  David- 
son of  Greensburg,  James  M.  Hanna  of 
Sullivan,  and  James  L.  Worden  of  Fort 
Wayne,  were  chosen  by  practical  unani- 

J.  J.  Bingham,  Marion  County,  Chair- 
man; S.  M.  Barton,  Levi  Sparks,  S.  H. 
Buskirk,  James  B.  Foley,  Eleazer  Malone, 
William  Henderson,  W.  M.  Franklin,  E. 
M.  Weaver,  P.  M.  Kent,  Thomas  Tigar, 
Dr.  A.  Weaver. 


At  Large — Joseph  E.  McDonald,  James 
M.  Hanna,  William  E.  Niblack,  Alfred  P. 

Contingents — Julius  Boetticher,  John 
Pettit,  James  W.  Gaff,  Samuel  A.  Hall. 

First  District— A.  T.  Whittlesey,  Van- 
derburgh county ;  Cutler  S.  Dobbins,  Mar- 
tin county. 

Second  District — Levi  Sparks,  Clarke 
county;  John  L.  Menaugh,  Washington 

Third  District — William  McEwen,  Bar- 
tholomew county;  Mede  W.  Shields,  Jack- 
son county. 

Fourth  District — Marcus  Levy,  Dear- 
born county;  John  S.  Campbell,  Rush 

Fifth  District — Lafe  Develin,  Wayne 
county;  William  C.  Applegate,  Fayette 

Sixth  District — A.  B.  Conduitt,  Morgan 
county ;  H.  H.  Dodd,  Marion  county. 

Seventh  District — John  G.  Davis,  Vigo 
county ;  Andy  Humphreys,  Green  county. 

Eighth  District— Samuel  C.  Wilson, 
Montgomery  county ;  E.  F.  Lucas,  Warren 

Ninth  District — J.  A.  Taylor,  Cass  coun- 
ty; Horace  Corbin,  Marshall  county. 

Tenth  District— David  H.  Colerick,  Allen 
county;  E.  V.  Long,  Kosciusko  county. 

Eleventh  District— L.  P.  Milligan,  Hunt- 
ington county;  David  Studabaker,  Adams 


At  Large^ — John  Pettit,  Lafayette; 
Simeon  K.  Wolfe,  Corydon. 

— District  Electors — 

1st— S.  M.  Holcombe. 

2nd — Elijah  Newland. 

3rd— A.  B.  Carleton. 

4th— B.  W.  Wilson. 

5th — James  Brown. 

6th — Frank  Landers. 

7th — Arch  Johnston. 

8th — Jonathan  C.  Applegate. 

9th— John  G.  Osborn. 
10th — Robert  Lowry. 
nth— J.  W.  Sansbury. 

The  greater  part  of  this  document  is 
devoted  to  the  unsparing  denunciation  of 
Governor  Morton  for  inducing  members 
of  the  Legislature  to  lend  themselves  to 
questionable  and  unlawful  acts ;  for  estab- 
lishing a  "financial  bureau"  without  au- 
thority of  law;  for  countenancing  the 
reckless  expenditure  of  public  moneys. 
The  general  administration  comes  in  for 
censure  for  suspending  the  writ  of  habeas 
corpus,  for  suppressing  newspapers,  for 
arresting  citizens  without  warrant,  etc. 
Other  arraignments  are  set  forth  in  these 
terms  : 

"That  the  failure  of  the  administration 
to  promptly  pay  disabled  or  discharged 
soldiers,  and  pensions  to  the  widows  and 
children  whose  husbands  and  fathers  have 
fallen  in  battle  or  died  in  camp  or  by  the 
wayside,  and  the  readiness  with  which  the 
powers  at  Washington  audit  and  pay 
shoddy  contractors,  officers  and  placemen 
of  the  Government,  are  cruel  wrongs  to  the 
destitute  and  deserving,  and  merit  the 
withering  scorn  of  the  American  people. 

"That  the  noble  and  patriotic  sons  of  In- 
diana, who,  for  love  of  country  and  a 
restoration  of  the  Union  as  established  by 
our  fathers,  have  sacrificed  the  endear- 
ments of  home  for  the  hardships  and  perils 
of  war,  merit  the  thanks  of  the  people  of 
Indiana;  that  we  will  ever  hold  in  grateful 
recollection  the  memory  of  those  who  have 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

fallen  in  battle,  and  that  it  is  the  duty,  and 
should  be  the  highest  pleasui-e  of  the 
people  to  make  ample  provision  for  the  sup- 
port of  those  who  have  received  disabil- 
ities in  the  service  of  the  country,  and  the 
thousands  of  widows  and  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  orphan  children,  whose  husbands 
and  fathers  have  sacrificed  their  lives  in 
defense  of  their  country  and  honor  of  the 
American  flag. 

"That  a  faithful  adherence  to  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States,  to  which 
the  Democracy  are  pledged,  necessarily  im- 
plies the  restoration  of  liberty  and  the 
rights  of  the  States  under  that  Constitu- 
tion unimpaired,  and  will  lead  to  an  early 
and  honorable  peace. 

"Resolved,  That  we,  the  Democracy  of 
Indiana,  in  State  convention  assembled, 
are  in  favor  of  maintaining  personal  and 
constitutional  liberty,  and  we  pledge  our- 
selves to  sustain  our  rights  as  citizens  to 
the  bitter  end." 

Though  the  personal  relations  between 
Morton  and  McDonald  were  "reasonably 
friendly,"  both  having  been  intellectual 
giants,  a  good  deal  of  bitterness  was  in- 
jected into  the  joint  discussions  that  were 
held  in  various  parts  of  the  State.  The 
Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle  came  in  for 
a  large  share  of  invective  on  the  part  of 
Governor  Morton,  who  denounced  that 
oath-bound  organization  in  unmeasured 
terms  as  bands  of  traitors  to  their  coun- 
try and  as  having  for  their  purpose  the 
overthrow  of  Governmental  institutions. 
The  trials  for  treason  of  William  A. 
Bowles,  Andrew  Humphreys,  Horace  Hef- 
fren,  Lambdin  P.  Milligan  and  Stephen 
Horsey,  elaborately  and  sensationally  re- 
ported in  the  Indianapolis  Journal  during 
the  campaign,  were  utilized  for  all  they 
could  be  made  to  serve.  Governor  Mor- 
ton was.  however,  somewhat  hampered  in 
the  attempt  to  hold  the  Democracy  re- 
sponsible for  the  acts,  aims  and  purposes 
of  these  leaders  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Golden  Circle  and  Sons  of  Liberty  by  the 
heroic  action  of  the  Hon.  Michael  C.  Kerr 
of  New  Albany,  in  going  to  Indianapolis 
to  lay  bare  to  Governor  Morton  the  plots 

of  these  conspirators.  The  fact  that  Mr. 
Kerr  was  the  Democratic  nominee  for 
Congress  in  the  New  Albany  district  and 
that  he  had  step  by  step  risen  to  great 
prominence  in  the  party  of  his  choice, 
greatly  handicapped  Governor  Morton  in 
making  such  use  of  the  machinations  of 
these  visionaiy  marplots  as  he  had  hoped 
to  be  able  to  do  during  the  progress  of 
the  campaign. 

Though  David  Turpie  was  nominated 
for  Lieutenant-Governor,  he  was  induced 
to  withdraw  from  the  State  ticket  in  order 
that  he  might  comply  with  the  wishes  of 
the  Democracy  of  his  district  to  make  an- 
other race  for  Congress  against  Schuyler 
Colfax.  He  was  reluctant  to  do  this,  but 
finally  yielded  to  the  entreaties  of  the 
Democratic  leaders  of  the  South  Bend  dis- 
trict. His  place  on  the  State  ticket  was 
filled  by  the  selection  of  that  gallant  war- 
rior, General  Mahlon  D.  Manson,  of  Craw- 

Although  it  seemed  for  a  time  as  if  the 
Democracy  might  win  in  State  and  nation, 
developments  toward  the  close  of  the  cam- 
paign plainly  foreshadowed  the  re-election 
of  Lincoln  to  the  Presidency  and  the  tri- 
umph of  Morton  in  Indiana.  Only  three 
of  the  eleven  Democrats  nominated  for 
Congress  in  this  State  were  successful  at 
the  polls,  and  of  these  three  Daniel  W. 
Voorhees  was  subsequently  un.seated  on 
contest.  Niblack  and  Kerr  had  to  their 
credit  such  decisive  majorities  as  to  ren- 
der them  incontestably  secure.  The  Legis- 
lature chosen  was  also  strongly  Repub- 
lican and  very  much  to  Morton's  personal 
and  political  liking.  Morton  was  credited 
with  a  majority  of  20,883  over  McDonald, 
while  Conrad  Baker  led  General  Manson 
by  16,139.     The  vote  stood: 

Oliver  P.  Morton 152.084 

Jospph  E.  McDonald 131,201 

Conrad  Baker 147.795 

Mahlon  P.  Manson 131.(i5(; 

At  the  Presidential  election  in  Novem- 
ber Abraham  Lincoln  polled  150,422  votes 
and  General  Geo.  B.  McClellan  130,233. 

(  209  ) 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1916 

CONGRESSIONAL  RESULTS,  1864.  man  attempts  to  haul  down  the  American 

1.  W.  E.  Niblack,  Democrat 14,721    2,111  flag,  shoot  him  on  the  Spot."     The  utter- 

Cyrus  M.  Allen,  Republican. . .  .12,610  ances  of  Stephen  A.  Douglas  were  the  real 

^'  WilHaSw  Curr'  °RTubHcan''^9  564    ^''^^^  expression  of  Democratic  sentiment.    And 

3.  Henry'w^HrrrinitotDem^^^^^^  ^^ese  utterances  could  not  be  neutralized 
Ralph  Hill,  Republican 12,075    1,237  by    the    mutterings    of    any    self-styled 

4.  Dr.  George  Berry,  Democrat 8,949  "knights"    whose    foolish    performances 

John  H.  Farquhar,  Republican.  .10,015    1,066  were  carried  on  in  caves  and  caverns. 

5.  George  W.  Julian,  Republican.  .13,426     7,145  q^j^^    ^„    ^^^^^    ^^^    ^^^^    ^^^.         ^j^^ 
James  Brown,  Democrat 6,281  ,        .,,.,.       ^^                 ,           .,,       ,, 

6.  John  Love,  Democrat 10,898  ^ar    to    identify    Democrats    with    these 

Ebenezer  Dumont,  Republican.  .18,886    7,988  oath-bound  treasonable  organizations.  The 

7.  Daniel  W.  Voorhees,  Democrat.  12,830       534  exact  truth  about  the  matter  is  that  Dem- 
Henry  D.  Washburn,  Repub. ..  .12,296  ocrats  were  vexed  a  good  deal  more  over 

8.  James  S.Harney,  Democrat....  12,349  ^^^^^  visionary  organizations  than  were 
Godlove   S.   Orth,  Republican.  .  .13,536     1,187      „         ,  ,.                rr,,      f ,, 

9.  David  Turpie,  Democrat 15,278  Republicans.    The  latter  utilized  them  for 

Schuyler  Colfax,  Republican. .  .16,658    1,380  political   purposes,   while   Democrats   ex- 

10.  Joseph  K.  Edgerton,  Democrat.  .14,037  erted  themselves  to  point  out  to  misguided 
JosephH.Defrees,  Republican..  14,617      580  and   wrong-headed   individuals  ai^iliating 

11.  James  F.  McDowell,  Democrat.  .13,383  +u^,.^,„uu   +i,„  f^^^„  ^f  +!,„,•«  „^„« rrr,„ 

mi.          1.T  ciMi     11  T1      ui-        ir\,oo    n  r, . „  therewith  the  tolly  or  their  course.     Ihe 
Thomas  N.  Stillwell,  Republican.  15,623     2,240 

recital  of  an  occurrence  in  the  southern 

POLITICAL  SECRET  ORDERS  NOT  part  of  the  State,  as  narrated  by  William 
FAVORED  BY  REAL  DEMOCRATS.  Wesley  Woollen,  will  make  clear  to  the  un- 
As  already  stated,  during  the  Guberna-  biased  the  folly  of  attempting  to  foist  up- 
torial  campaign  of  1864  between  Oliver  P.  on  the  Democratic  party  as  such  responsi- 
Morton  and  Joseph  E.  McDonald,  a  good  bility  for  the  existence  of  the  secret  or- 
deal was  said  about  the  "Sons  of  Liberty,"  ganizations  under  consideration: 

"Knights  of  the  Golden  Circle"  and  kin-  <.,,     „                       4.  •  x  t    -io^a  u 

J     J            .     ^.        J,          1       1  J.    X       T  ,  Mr.  Kerr  was  a  patriot.  In  1864  he  was 

dred  organizations  formed  and  fostered  by  ^  candidate  for  the  Democratic  nomination 

individuals  who  seemingly  had  forgotten  for  Congress,  the  late    Colonel    Cyrus    L. 

that  "Old  Hickory,"  idolized  by  all  Dem-  Dunham   being  his   principal   competitor, 

ocrats,  proclaimed  an  indissoluble  union  of  The  nominating  convention  met  at  Jeffer- 

indestructible  States  to  be  an  inviolable  ?rn''^?'  '1  ^^^  ?i^  Methodist  church,  on 

,       ,     »  .         .        „  Wall  street.     Politics  was   at   fever   heat, 

tenet  of  American  Democracy.  ^^^   ^^e   contest   between   Mr.   Kerr   and 

Andrew   Jackson,    Southerner   that   he  Colonel  Dunham  was  very  close.    An  hour 

was,   never  countenanced  treason   or   re-  or  so  before  the  convention  was  to  meet 

bellion.    When  South  Carolina  threatened  ^^^  ^err  called  a  caucus  of  his  friends  in 

„.^  ,.  >.  j_  .^  ,  XI  j_  a  room  over  the  store  of  General  Sparks, 
nullification  of  tariff  laws  that  were  ^here  were  present  at  the  caucus  several 
deemed  inimical  to  the  interests  of  its  peo-  of  Mr.  Kerr's  friends  from  New  Albany ; 
pie,  "Old  Hickory"  bluntly  told  them  that  General  Sparks  and  Mr.  J.  P.  Applegate, 
any  man  or  set  of  men  who  might  at-  from  Clark  county ;  Hon.  William  H.  Eng- 
tempt  to  nullify  the  laws  of  the  land  Hsh  then  a  resident  of  Scott  county;  Gen- 
,  ,  ,  ,  ,  .  ,  ,T  «Ti  eral  James  A.  Cravens,  of  Washington 
would  be  hung  as  high  as  Haman.  By  ^^^^^y^  ^^^  ^  f^^  other  gentlemen  from 
the  Eternal,  the  Union  must  and  shall  be  different  parts  of  the  district.  The  gentle- 
preserved  !"  he  thundered  at  the  would-be  men  thus  called  together  supposed  the  pur- 
nullifiers.  General  John  A.  Dix,  as  Sec-  Pose  of  the  meeting  was  to  make  arrange- 
retary  of  the  Treasury  under  Buchanan,  "?e"ts  for  the  management  of  the  conyen- 
1  i.  -c  J  j-u  J.-  1  •  -.^r.-,  ,  tion.  When  all  were  seated,  Mr.  Kerr 
electrified  the  nation  early  m  1861  by  arose,  drew  himself  up  to  his  full  height  of 
sending   broadcast   the    dictum,    "If   any  six  feet  or  more,  and,  with  suppressed  ex- 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

citement  but  with  perfect  self-control,  said 
he  must  withdraw  from  the  race  for 
Congress ;  that  he  was  in  possession  of  the 
knowledge  that  a  conspiracy  existed 
against  the  government  of  the  State ;  that 
the  conspirators  were  Democrats ;  that  he 
felt  it  his  duty  to  go  to  Indianapolis  and 
lay  the  facts  before  Governor  Morton ; 
that  such  a  course  would  embitter  certain 
Democrats  and  jeopardize  his  election 
should  he  be  a  candidate.  Mi*.  English  and 
others  made  remarks  after  Mr.  Kerr  had 
taken  his  seat,  the  purport  of  which  was 
that  he  was  right  in  his  purpose  to  make 
known  and  denounce  the  conspiracy,  but 
wrong  in  determining  to  withdraw  from 
the  contest ;  that  only  a  few  hot-heads  had 
gone  wrong;  that  the  great  body  of  the 
party  was  loyal  to  the  Government.  Mr. 
Kerr  persisted  in  his  purpose  to  decline, 
and  it  was  formally  announced  that  he  was 
no  longer  a  candidate.  Afterward,  how- 
ever, several  gentlemen  were  sent  to  him 
by  the  various  county  delegations,  who 
urged  him  to  stand.  He  finally  consented 
to  do  so,  and  was  nominated.  He  came  at 
once  to  Indianapolis  to  expose  the  con- 
spiracy, and  what  he  did  can  be  best  told 
by  giving  the  testimony  of  one  of  the  wit- 
nesses in  the  trials  of  Bowles,  Milligan  and 
others.    Says  this  witness: 

As  I  walked  down  Washington  street  I  saw  a 
gentleman  coming-  up  rapidly,  and  I  stopped  him. 
"Hello,  Kerr;  what  has  brought  you  here?"  said  I. 
He  seemed  very  much  excited.  "Do  you  know 
anything?"  he  said;  and  I  said,  "Do  you  know 
anything?"  "Yes,"  he  replied.  "What  is  it?" 
said  I.  He  then  said,  "The  devil's  to  pay  in  our 
section  of  the  State;  the  people  of  Washington, 

Harri.son  and  Floyd  counties  and  that  neighbor- 
hood have  got  the  idea  that  a  revolution  was  im- 
pending; the  farmers  were  frightened  and  were 
selling  their  hay  in  the  fields  and  their  wheat  in 
the  stacks,  and  all  the  property  that  could  be  was 
being  converted  into  greenbacks." 

Mr.  Kerr  was  so  deeply. impressed  with 
the  danger  of  the  situation  that  he  and  the 
witness  from  whom  I  have  quoted  went  tc 
the  residence  of  Hon.  Jo.seph  E.  McDonald 
in  the  night,  awakened  that  gentleman  and 
told  him  what  they  knew  about  the  con- 
spiracy. It  was  agreed  that  a  meeting  of 
prominent  Democrats  should  be  called  next 
morning  at  Mr.  McDonald's  office  to  con- 
sider the  situation.  The  meeting  was  held, 
and  during  its  sitting  Mr.  Kerr  made  a 
speech.     I  again  quote  from  this  witness : 

He  spoke  about  this  excitement,  this  revolution- 
ary scheme,  and  said  that  he  came  up  on  purpose 
to  put  a  stop  to  the  thing.  I  think  he  said  it  was 
our  duty  to  stop  it,  and  if  it  could  not  be  stopped 
in  any  other  way  it  was  our  duty  to  inform  the 

"Mr.  Kerr  was  su.stained  in  his  position 
by  Mr.  McDonald  and  other  prominent 
Democrats,  but  there  is  no  gainsaying  the 
fact  that  he  was  the  leading  man  of  his 
party  in  the  effort  to  destroy  the  con- 
spiracy, which,  had  it  been  inaugurated, 
would  have  deluged  Indiana  with  blood. 

"The  action  of  Mr.  Kerr  in  proposing  to 
decline  the  race  for  Congress  in  his  distrid 
was  in  keeping  with  his  character.  Young, 
and  ambitious  for  political  preferment,  he 
was  yet  willing  to  stand  aside  for  others 
when  he  believed  duty  called  him  to  make 
the  sacrifice." 

[Chapter  XXIX.] 



gressed  it  was  deemed  wise  to  make  John- 
son military  governor  of  Tennessee,  in 
which  capacity  he  could  serve  the  Union 
cause  far  more  effectively  than  in  the  Sen- 
ate at  Washington.  It  was  Lincoln's  opin- 
ion that  the  spirit  of  patriotism  displayed 
by  War  Democrats  throughout  the  coun- 
try, but  especially  in  the  South,  ought  to  be 
given  deserved  and  substantial  recogni- 
tion. There  was  much  in  Andrew  John- 
son's career  that  commended  itself  to  Lin- 
coln's favor.  Like  himself,  Johnson  was  of 
humble  origin.  Dependent  upon  his  own 
resources  in  his  boyhood  days,  no  educa- 
tional advantages  were  within  his  reach. 
Instead  of  being  made  the  beneficiary  of 
schooling  he  served  an  apprenticeship  in 
a  tailor  shop.  A  charming  Tennessee 
girl  attracted  his  attention  and  challenged 
his  admiration.  In  course  of  time  this 
ambitious  young  man  and  this  buoyant 
maiden  were  united  in  marriage.  She 
chanced  to  be  an  apt  teacher,  he  an  apt 
pupil.  She  taught  him  to  read  and  write. 
With  the  acquisition  of  this  educational 
facility  came  an  intense  longing  for  read- 
ing books  and  acquiring  knowledge. 
Young  Johnson  made  rapid  progress.  A 
fine  specimen  of  manhood,  he  soon  ingrati- 
ated himself  in  popular  favor,  was  elected 
to  various  oflices,  became  Governor  of  his 
State,  and  toward  the  expiration  of  his 
term  was  chosen  United  States  Senator. 
In  the  latter  capacity  he  made  an  en- 
viable record  in  championing  the  home- 
stead policy  for  bona  fide  settlers  in  the 
territories  and  kindred  measures  in  the 
interest  of  struggling  humanity.  To  An- 
drew Johnson  belongs  the  credit  of  having 
first   urged   in   Congress   the   election    of 

FiTTrnMMmTnnjii  HAT  OHver  p.  Morton  was  a 
'  I  '  I  man  of  extraordinary  intellect- 
I  i  ual  power  will  not  be  seriously 
J_  I  questioned  by  any  one  at  all 
'  familiar  with  his  career  as  po- 
litical leader.  Governor  or 
United  States  Senator.  As  a 
platform  speaker  he  was  neither  ornate 
nor  eloquent.  He  disdained  indulgence  in 
flowery  rhetoric.  His  preference  ran  de- 
cidedly to  "sledge-hammer"  argument. 
With  all  the  vigor  of  his  masterful  mind 
he  marshaled  his  facts  and  drove  his 
points  into  the  understanding  of  his  hear- 
ers. It  may  be  assumed  that  he  was  sub- 
ject to  mental  anguish  if  he  suspected  that 
he  did  not  make  himself  clearly  under- 
stood or  failed  to  carry  conviction  to  his 
audience.  Intense  earnestness  marked  all 
of  his  more  important  utterances  on  ques- 
tions of  great  moment. 

The  reconstruction  of  the  Southern 
States  lately  in  rebellion  engaged  popular 
attention  to  an  eminent  degree.  It  be- 
came the  "paramount  issue,"  soon  follow- 
ing the  suppression  of  the  rebellion.  The 
assassination  of  Abraham  Lincoln  by  John 
Wilkes  Booth  imposed  the  duties  and  re- 
sponsibilities of  the  presidential  office  on 
Andrew  Johnson,  whom  Lincoln  himself 
desired  as  his  running  mate  in  the  cam- 
paign of  1864.  Johnson  was  at  the  break- 
ing out  of  the  rebellion  a  United  States 
Senator  from  Tennessee,  elected  by  a 
Democratic  legislature.  He  had  always 
been  a  Democrat.  His  place  of  residence 
was  in  East  Tennessee,  where  public  sen- 
timent was  intensely  loyal  to  the  Union. 
Secession  was  hated  and  rebellion  stoutly 
condemned  and  resisted.    As  the  war  pro- 




United  States  Senators  by  direct  vote  of 
the  people.  He  was  an  intensely  earnest, 
thoroughly  honest  and  ruggedly  patriotic 
Tennesseean  and  American. 

Mr.  Lincoln  was  neither  personally  nor 
politically  averse  to  Vice-President  Han- 
nibal Hamlin,  his  running  mate  in  1860, 
but,  as  already  stated,  he  believed  that  his 
associate  on  the  1864  ticket  ought  to  be  a 
war  Democrat.  And  he  preferred  John- 
son to  all  others  because  he  had  formed 
the  opinion  that  the  nomination  of  a 
Southerner  would  have  the  effect  of  pre- 
venting the  recognition  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy  by  England  and  France — a 
danger  then  quite  imminent. 

For  some  time  after  Johnson's  acces- 
sion to  the  Presidency  the  belief  was  quite 
common  that  Lincoln's  developed  program 
for  the  reconstruction  of  the  States  lately 
in  rebellion  would  be  carried  out  without 
encountering  serious  opposition.  The  fear 
that  found  most  expression  was  that 
Johnson,  by  reason  of  personal  animosity 
to  Southern  leaders  who  had  grossly  ma- 
ligned and  persecuted  him  before,  during 
and  after  the  rebellion,  would  be  far  more 
strenuous  in  imposing  terms  of  punish- 
ment than  Lincoln  would  have  been  had 
he  lived.  There  was  some  ground  for  this 
belief,  but  circumstances  shaped  affairs 
differently.  There  was  in  the  Republican 
camp  an  element  that  did  not  take  kindly 
to  Lincoln's  conservative  and  conciliatory 
policy.  The  leader  of  this  faction  was 
Thaddeus  Stevens  of  Pennsylvania,  a  man 
of  marked  ability  and  of  intense  hating 
predilection.  Amazingly  unscrupulous,  he 
hesitated  at  nothing  after  determining  to 
accomplish  a  purpose.  He  came  near 
plunging  Pennsylvania  into  war  during 
the  thirties  when  he  had  autocratically 
resolved  to  retain  Joseph  Ritner  in  the 
gubernatorial  chair  after  being  defeated 
at  the  polls.  The  Stevens  conspiracy  was 
prevented  by  the  appearance  at  the  State 
Capitol  in  Harrisburg  of  a  company  of 
men   from   Philadelphia   whose  sternness 

of  purpose  admitted  of  no  doubt  as  to 
what  they  would  do  to  Thaddeus  if  he 
persisted  in  counting  in  the  man  who  had 
been  voted  out  at  the  election  in  October. 

It  may  be  stated  that  Stevens  was  very 
much  opposed  to  the  nomination  of  An- 
drew Johnson  to  the  vice-presidency  in 
1864.  To  the  last  he  persisted  in  insisting 
on  the  renomination  of  Hannibal  Hamlin. 
He  couldn't  see  either  sense  or  propriety 
in  taking  up  for  the  second  highest  office 
a  man  whose  habitation  was  in  a  "d  —  d 
rebel  province." 

Stevens  M'as  a  bachelor,  club-footed, 
hard-faced,  vindictive.  When  a  Republi- 
can contested  the  seat  of  a  Democrat  in 
Congress  Stevens  did  not  pay  the  slightest 
attention  to  the  evidence  adduced  in  the 
case.  He  simply  inquired  of  some  one  in 
interest,  "What  is  the  name  of  our  ras- 
cal?" and  at  once  voted  to  seat  him  in 
place  of  the  man  really  elected.  He  was 
passionately  fond  of  a  game  of  poker,  de- 
nied the  existence  of  a  God,  and  hooted 
at  the  idea  of  man  being  the  creation 
of  what  was  called  "the  Almighty."  On 
the  latter  point  he  was  wont  to  say  that 
an  engine  could  be  taken  apart;  if  any 
of  the  machinery  within  was  worn  out 
it  could  be  replaced  and  the  engine  again 
made  serviceable.  Not  so  with  man. 
"When  his  interior  becomes  impaired," 
Stevens  used  to  say,  "there  is  no  repair- 
ing or  replacing  of  worn-out  parts.  He 
is  done  for;  he  dies  and  is  buried." 

Stevens'  plan  of  reconstruction  was 
radically  different  from  that  of  Lincoln. 
Punishment,  not  restoration,  was  his  pro- 
gram. To  accomplish  his  purpose,  he 
availed  himself  of  every  opportunity  to 
discredit  the  Johnson  administration  and 
cast  odium  upon  it.  With  ghoulish  glee 
grossly  exaggerated  and  perverted  stories 
about  Johnson  having  been  drunk  when 
inaugurated  as  Vice-President  were  re- 
vamped. Conservative,  conscientious  Re- 
publicans were  dismayed  over  these  mani- 
festations of  bitterness  and  malignancy. 


1  8  1  G  -  1  9  1  6 

Governor  Morton,  himself  originally  a 
Democrat  and  still  a  believer  in  the  firmly 
established  doctrine  of  "an  indissoluble 
Union  of  indestructible  States,"  felt  im- 
pelled to  come  to  the  support  of  President 
Johnson.  He  chose  the  principal  town  of 
the  county  (Wayne)  in  which  he  grew 
to  manhood  and  prominence — the  Quaker 
city  of  Richmond — as  the  place  for  de- 
livering a  carefully  prepared  speech  in  de- 
fense of  Pi-esident  Johnson's  reconstruc- 
tion policy  and  in  opposition  to  the  mon- 
strous proposition  to  make  voters  of  the 
lately  emancipated  slaves  of  the  South. 
So  able  was  this  speech  in  its  presentation, 
so  conclusive  in  argument,  so  clear  and 
convincing,  that  Governor  Morton  never 
attempted  to  explain  it  away  after  he  had 
changed  front  and  championed  the  very 
opposite  of  what  he  contended  for  at 
Richmond  on  September  29,  1865. 

The  only  copy  of  this  speech  now  known 
to  be  in  existence  is  on  file  in  the  State 
Library  at  Indianapolis.  For  obvious  rea- 
sons scant  reference  is  made  to  it  in  the 
biographies  of  Oliver  P.  Morton,  and  yet 
it  may  fairly  be  said  to  have  been  the 
ablest  and  most  statesman-like  speech 
ever  made  by  this  intellectual  giant.  What 
a  pity  that  he  did  not  join  such  Repub- 
lican Senators  as  James  R.  Doolittle  of 
Wisconsin,  Lyman  Trumbull  of  Illinois, 
Edgar  Cowan  of  Pennsylvania,  James 
Dixon  of  Connecticut,  Daniel  S.  Norton 
of  Minnesota,  and  others  of  that  type  in 
upholding  the  hands  of  Andrew  Johnson 
in  carrying  out  the  humane  program 
mapped  out  by  Lincoln  for  the  establish- 
ment of  constitutional  government  in  the 
South.  Had  he  stood  by  the  doctrines 
laid  down  in  his  Richmond  speech,  had  he 
adhered  firmly  to  the  Lincoln- Johnson 
plan  of  unification  and  pacification,  there 
is  reason  to  believe  that  conservatism 
would  have  triumphed  and  radicalism 
would  not  have  been  permitted  to  do  its 
demoralizing  and  destructive  work.  The 
pages  of  American  history  might  thus 
have  been  kept  clear  and  clean  of  recitals 

of  the  outrageously  corrupt  and  disgrace- 
ful performances  that  for  years  charac- 
terized carpet-bag  rule  in  Southern  States. 
The  stupendous  folly  of  forcing  into  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States  the  fif- 
teenth amendment,  conferring  upon  vast 
hordes  of  densely  ignorant  beings  the 
right  of  suffrage,  might  not  now  fill  with 
apprehension  the  minds  of  discerning  stu- 
dents of  government.  The  thought  that 
in  a  number  of  States  in  the  South  public 
safety  imperatively  demands  organized 
denial  of  the  unrestricted  exercise  of  this 
constitutional  grant  awakens  suspicion 
that  sanity  must  have  been  dangerously 
clouded  and  obscured  when  that  vicious 
assault  upon  the  purity  and  beneficence 
of  the  ballot  was  first  conceived  and  finally 
perpetrated.  As  long  as  the  present  status 
of  pacific  submission  is  maintained,  and 
sanctioned  by  overwhelming  public  senti- 
ment North  and  South,  the  utter  perni- 
ciousness  of  this  license  for  the  pollution 
of  the  ballot  may  not  be  revealed  in  all 
its  hideousness ;  but  when  the  situation 
changes  and  the  subdued  mass  becomes 
aware  of  its  latent  power,  a  conflict  of 
races  may  prove  as  irrepressible  as  was 
the  conflict  between  slavery  and  freedom 
in  the  Fifties  and  early  Sixties. 

MOND, IND.,  SEPT.  29,  1865,  ON  RE- 

"So  that  Mr.  Johnson  has  restricted 
from  taking  the  oath  eight  classes  per- 
mitted by  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  so  far  his  plan 
is  more  stringent  than  Mr.  Lincoln's  was. 
Mr.  Lincoln,  in  his  plan  of  reconstruction, 
declared  all  persons  should  have  the  right 
to  vote  for  the  delegates  to  the  conventions 
which  might  be  called  in  the  States  to  form 
State  constitutions,  who  had  taken  the 
oath  prescribed  by  him,  and  who  were  law- 
ful voters  according  to  the  laws  of  the 
State  in  which  they  resided  before  the  pas- 
sage of  the  ordinance  of  secession.  Mr. 
Johnson  has  made  precisely  the  same  con- 
dition. Mr.  Lincoln  then  provided  for  the 
appointment  of  Provisional  Governors,  giv- 
ing to  them  the  power  of  calling  State  con- 


19  1 

ventions,  with  a  view  of  forming  State 
constitutions,  for  the  purpose  of  being  re- 
ceived back  into  full  practical  relations 
with  the  Government.  Mr.  Lincoln  did  the 
same.  Each  required  that  the  constitu- 
tions thus  formed  should  be  Republican  in 
form.  Mr.  Lincoln  put  forth  no  require- 
ment of  condition  that  was  not  equally 
contained  in  Mr.  Johnson's  proclamation. 
Their  plans  of  amnesty  and  reconstruction 
cannot  be  distinguished  from  each  other, 
except  in  the  particulars  I  have  already 
mentioned,  that  Mr.  Johnson  restricts  cer- 
tain persons  from  taking  the  oath,  unless 
they  first  have  a  special  pardon  from  him, 
whom  Mr.  Lincoln  permitted  to  come  for- 
ward and  take  the  oath  without  it ;  and  in 
the  further  diff'erence  before  mentioned, 
that  Mr.  Lincoln  required  one-tenth  of  the 
people  of  the  State  to  show  a  willingness 
to  take  the  oath,  while  Mr.  Johnson  has 
said  nothing  whatever  about  that.  This 
was  Mr.  Lincoln's  favorite  policy.  It  was 
presented  by  him  to  Congress  on  the  8th  of 
January,  1863,  accompanied  by  a  message. 
In  the  course  of  the  next  year,  1864,  on 
several  occasions,  Mr.  Lincoln  distinctly 
presented,  again  and  again,  this  policy  of 
amnesty  and  reconstruction  to  the  people 
of  the  South.  It  was  his  settled  and 
favorite  policy  at  the  time  he  was  re- 
nominated for  election  by  the  Union  con- 
vention at  Baltimore  last  summer,  and  in 
that  convention  the  party  sustained  him 
and  strongly  endorsed  his  whole  policy,  of 
which  this  was  a  prominent  part.  Mr. 
Lincoln  was  triumphantly  and  overwhelm- 
ingly elected  upon  that  policy,  and  soon 
after  his  election,  in  December,  1864,  in  his 
last  annual  message  to  Congress,  he  again 
brings  forward  this  same  policy  of  his  and 
presents  it  to  the  Nation.  And  again,  on 
the  12th  of  April,  only  two  days  before  his 
death,  he  referred  to  and  presented  this 
policy  of  amnesty  and  reconstruction.  That 
speech  may  be  called  his  last  speech,  his 
dying  words  to  the  people,  and  I  desire  to 
refer  to  it.  You  remember  the  occasion. 
It  was  after  Richmond  had  been  evacuated. 
It  was  the  day  after  they  had  received  the 
news  of  Lee's  surrender.  Washington 
city  was  illuminated.  A  large  crowd  came 
in  front  of  the  White  House  and  Mr.  Lin- 
coln spoke  to  them  from  one  of  the  win- 
dows. He  referred  to  the  organization  of 
Louisiana  under  his  plan  of  amnesty  and 
reconstruction,  and,  in  speaking  of  it,  he 
gave  the  history  of  his  policy.    He  said: 

In  my  annual  message  of  December,  1863,  and 
accompanying  the  proclamation,  I  presented  a 
plan  of  reconstruction,  as  the  phrase  goes,  which 
1  promised,  if  adopted  by  any  State,  would  be 
acceptable,  and  sustained  by  the  Executive  Gov- 
ernment of  the  nation.  I  distinctly  stated  that 
this  was  a  plan  which  might  possibly  be  accept- 
able, and  also  distinctly  protested  that  the  Exec- 
utive claimed  no  right  to  say  when  or  whether 
members  should  be  admitted  to  seats  in  Congress 
from  such  States. 

"I  want  to  make  one  remark  right  here. 
It  is  said  that,  under  Mr.  Johnson's  policy 
of  reconstruction,  the  men  who  originated 
and  carried  on  the  rebellion  can  be  returned 
to  seats  in  Congress  as  Senators  and  Rep- 
resentatives. The  gentlemen  who  talk  that 
way  forget  that  on  the  2nd  of  July,  1862, 
Congress  passed  an  act,  which  has  never 
been  repealed,  and  is  now  in  full  force  and 
effect,  prohibiting  any  person  from  holding 
any  Federal  office,  high  or  low,  great  or 
small,  who  has  directly  or  indirectly  been 
concerned  in  this  rebellion,  and  there  is  no 
danger  of  the  rebel  leaders  going  into  Con- 
gress unless  the  members  of  that  body 
shall  prove  recreant  to  their  trust  and  fail 
to  enforce  a  law  now  unrepealed  upon  the 
statute  books.  Mr.  Lincoln  referred  to  the 
act  of  Congress,  and  said  distinctly  that  he 
claimed  no  power  to  influence  the  admis- 
sion of  members  of  Congress,  and  no  power 
to  bring  forward  a  man  who  had  been  dis- 
franchised and  rendered  ineligible  by  an 
act  of  Congress.  Mr.  Johnson  has  never 
for  a  moment  claimed  that  he  could  do  such 
a  thing.  The  act  of  Congress  was  binding 
upon  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  it  is  no  less  binding 
upon  Mr.  Johnson,  and  it  has  not  been  pro- 
posed by  the  plan  of  either  to  interfere 
with  the  operation  of  a  statute,  or  bring 
any  man  into  Congress  or  into  the  posses- 
sion of  any  Federal  office  who  has  been 
made  ineligible  by  law.  'This  plan,'  says 
Mr.  Lincoln,  speaking  of  his  plan  of  re- 
construction— 'This  plan  was,  in  advance, 
submitted  to  the  Cabinet,  and  approved  by 
every  member  of  it.  One  of  them  sug- 
gested that  I  should  then  apply  the  Eman- 
cipation Proclamation  thereto,  except  in 
parts  of  Virginia  and  Louisiana,  and  that 
I  should  drop  the  suggestion  about  appren- 
ticeship, for  freed  people,  and  that  I  should 
omit  the  protest  against  my  own  power  in 
regard  to  admission  of  members  of  Con- 
gress, but  even  then  he  approved  every 
part  and  parcel  of  the  plan,  which  has  since 
been  employed  or  touched  by  the  action  of 

"Here  Mr.  Lincoln,  just  before  his  death, 




gives  the  history  of  his  plan  of  reconstruc- 
tion. He  says  it  was  submitted  to  every 
member  of  his  Cabinet — and  who  were  the 
members  of  his  Cabinet  at  that  time? 
Chief  Justice  Chase,  Edwin  M.  Stanton  and 
Wm.  H.  Seward  were  among  them,  and 
surely  the  indorsement  of  such  men  as 
these  must  give  additional  weight  to  any 
measure.    Mr.  Lincoln  goes  on: 

The  new  constitution  of  Louisiana,  declaring 
emancipation  for  the  whole  State,  practically 
applies  the  proclamation  to  that  part  previously 
exempted.  It  does  not  adopt  apprenticeship  for 
freed  people,  and  is  silent,  as  it  could  not  well  be 
otherwise,  about  the  admission  of  members  to  Con- 
gress. As  it  applied  to  Louisiana,  every  member 
of  Congress  fully  approved  the  plan  of  the  mes- 
sage. I  received  many  commendations  of  the 
plan,  written  and  verbal,  and  not  a  single  objec- 
tion from  any  professed  emancipationist,  until 
after  news  was  received  at  Washington  that  the 
people  of  Louisiana  had  begun  to  move  in  accord- 
ance with  it,  from  about  July,  1864. 

"In  conclusion,  upon  this  subject  he  used 
the  following  language: 

Such  has  been  my  only  agency  in  the  Louisiana 
movement.  My  promise  is  made,  as  I  have  previ- 
ously stated,  but  as  bad  promises  are  better 
broken  than  kept,  I  shall  treat  this  as  a  bad 
promise,  and  break  it  whenever  I  shall  be  con- 
vinced that  keeping  it  is  adverse  to  the  public  in- 
terest.   But  I  have  not  yet  been  so  convinced. 

"Now,  we  find  Mr.  Lincoln,  just  before 
his  death,  referring  in  warm  and  strong 
terms  to  his  policy  of  amnesty  and  recon- 
struction, and  giving  it  his  endorsement, 
giving  to  the  world  that  which  had  never 
been  given  before — the  history  of  that  plan 
and  policy,  stating  that  it  had  been  pre- 
sented and  endorsed  by  every  member  of 
that  able  and  distinguished  Cabinet  of 
1863.  Mr.  Lincoln  may  be  said  to  have 
died  holding  out  to  the  Nation  his  policy 
of  amnesty  and  reconstruction.  It  was 
held  out  by  him  at  the  very  time  the  rebels 
laid  down  their  arms. 

"Mr.  Lincoln  died  by  the  hand  of  an  as- 
sassin, and  Mr.  Johnson  came  into  power. 
He  took  Mr.  Lincoln's  Cabinet  as  he  had 
left  it,  and  he  took  Mr.  Lincoln's  policy  of 
amnesty  and  reconstruction  as  he  had  left 
it,  and  as  he  had  presented  it  to  the  world 
only  two  days  before  his  death.  Mr.  John- 
son has  honestly  and  faithfully  attempted 
to  administer  that  policy,  which  had  been 
bequeathed  by  that  man  around  whose 
grave  a  whole  world  has  gathered  as 

"I  refer  to  these  facts  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  that  Mr.  Johnson's  policy  is 

not  a  new  one,  but  that  he  is  simply  carry- 
ing out  the  policy  left  to  him  by  his  la- 
mented predecessor — a  policy  that  had 
been  endorsed  by  the  whole  nation  in  the 
re-election  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  and  had  been 
promulgated  to  the  whole  world  nearly  one 
year  before  the  time  of  his  last  election. 

"I  want  to  remark  one  thing  more  upon 
that  subject.  I  want  to  refer  to  the  action 
of  Congress  in  reference  to  the  question 
of  reconstruction.  You  will  remember 
that  some  time  in  the  month  of  April,  Hen- 
ry Winter  Davis,  a  very  distinguished  Con- 
gressman from  Maryland,  introduced  a  bill 
called  the  Winter  Davis  Bill.  It  provided 
a  plan  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  rebel 
States,  to  bring  them  back  into  practical 
relations  with  the  Government.  It  dif- 
fered from  the  plan  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  in 
some  important  respects,  one  of  which 
was  that,  in  electing  delegates  to  the  State 
convention  that  was  to  reorganize  the 
State  government,  he  allowed  no  man  to 
vote  who  had  been  concerned  in  the  rebel- 
lion in  any  way.  I  want  to  call  your  at- 
tention very  briefly  to  that  bill  and  show 
you  how  far  Congress  was  committed  by 
its  own  direct  action  to  the  main  points  in 
Mr.  Johnson's  policy  of  reconstruction. 
This  bill,  a  copy  of  which  I  have  here,  pro- 
vided for  the  appointment  of  Provisional 
Governors  in  these  States,  just  as  Mr.  Lin- 
coln's plan  had  done  and  Mr.  Johnson's 
now  does.  It  provided  that  these  Provi- 
sional Governors  might  call  State  conven- 
tions for  the  purpose  of  forming  State 
con.stitutions,  and  in  this  particular,  also, 
it  conformed  to  Mr.  Lincoln's  plan.  It 
then  went  on  to  define  the  question  of  the 
right  of  suff'rage  for  delegates  to  these  con- 
ventions. It  provided  that  the  delegates 
shall  be  elected  by  the  loyal  white  male 
citizens  of  the  United  States  of  the  age  of 
twentv-one  years,  and  residents  at  the 
time  in  the  county,  parish  or  district  in 
which  they  shall  offer  to  vote. 

"I  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that 
Congress  itself,  only  a  little  over  a  year 
ago,  when  it  assumed  to  take  the  whole 
question  of  reconstruction  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  President,  expressly  excluded  the 
negro  from  the  right  of  suffrage  in  voting 
for  the  men  who  were  to  frame  the  new 
constitutions  for  the  rebel  States.  Not 
only  that,  but  it  went  on  to  state  what  the 
constitutions  should  contain,  and  provided 
that  if  the  constitutions  to  be  formed  by 
these  conventions  should  conform  to  the 



provisions  of  this  bill,  then  those  States 
should  be  entitled  to  come  back  at  once. 
What  were  these  conditions?  They  only 
required  that  the  constitution  should  con- 
tain three  things:  first,  it  shall  contain  a 
provision  to  the  effect  that  no  person  who 
has  held  or  exercised  any  office,  civil  or 
military,  except  offices  merely  ministerial, 
and  military  offices  below  the  grade  of 
colonel,  State  or  Confederate,  under  the 
usurping  power,  shall  vote  for,  or  be  a 
member  of,  the  Legislature,  or  Governor. 
In  other  words,  the  bill  required  that  these 
conventions  should  exclude  from  the  right 
of  suffrage  in  the  South  all  persons  who 
had  been  in  the  rebel  army  above  the  rank 
of  colonel,  thereby  conceding  very  plainly 
that  they  might  give  the  right  of  suff'rage 
to  all  persons  below  that  rank.  The  bill 
provides,  secondly,  that  involuntary  servi- 
tude must  be  forever  prohibited  and  the 
freedom  of  all  persons  guaranteed  in  such 
States;  and  that  no  debt  or  obligation 
created  by  or  under  the  sanction  of  the 
usurping  power  shall  be  recognized  or  paid 
by  the  State. 

"These  were  all  the  conditions  that  were 
imposed  upon  the  constitutions  to  be 
framed  under  the  Henry  Winter  Davis 
bill.  It  simply  required,  if  you  please,  that 
the  constitution  of  South  Carolina  should 
not  give  the  right  of  suff'rage  to  any  man 
who  had  held  office  in  the  rebel  army  above 
the  rank  of  colonel;  and  that  involuntary 
servitude  should  be  abolished,  and  that 
they  should  not  assume  any  Confederate 
debt;  but  it  did  not  require  that  any  pro- 
vision be  made  to  confer  the  right  of  suf- 
frage upon  the  negro  at  any  time.  It  did 
not  require  that  they  should  make  provi- 
sion for  the  education  of  the  negro,  or  for 
giving  him  the  right  of  testifying  in  courts 
of  justice,  or  for  preserving,  in  any  partic- 
ular way,  what  may  be  called  his  civil 
rights.  Mr.  Lincoln,  as  you  remember,  re- 
fused to  sign  that  bill.  He  put  it  in  his 
pocket.  Though  it  had  received  a  majority 
in  both  Houses,  being  passed  in  the  House 
by  a  vote  of  74  to  66,  and  by  a  much  larger 
vote  in  the  Senate,  it  failed  to  become  a 
law.  Some  of  you  may,  perhaps,  remem- 
ber the  angry  manifesto  put  forth  in  con- 
sequence of  Mr.  Lincoln's  course  in  that 
matter  by  Mr.  Davis  and  Mr.  Wade,  and 
you  will  not  forget  that  the  result  was  to 
create  strife  and  division  in  the  ranks  of 
the  Union  party. 

"If  Mr.  Lincoln  had  not  refused  to  sign 

that  bill  there  would  today  be  an  act  of 
Congress  on  the  statute  books  absolutely 
prohibiting  negroes  frorh  any  participa- 
tion in  the  work  of  reorganization  and 
pledging  the  Government  in  advance  to  ac- 
cept of  the  constitutions  that  might  be 
formed  under  the  bill,  although  they  made 
no  provision  for  the  negro  beyond  the  fact 
of  his  personal  liberty.  If  that  bill  had 
become  a  law,  and  the  rebel  States  had 
formed  their  constitutions  under  it,  sim- 
ply guaranteeing  the  negro  his  personal 
liberty,  but  making  no  provision  for  suf- 
frage or  any  other  rights,  they  could  pre- 
sent their  members  of  Congress  and  you 
could  not  keep  them  out,  except  by  tram- 
pling on  one  of  the  acts  of  Congress.  But 
Mr.  Lincoln  refused  to  sign  it,  giving  his 
reason  for  doing  so,  and  it  is  only  another 
act  for  which  we  ought  to  thank  him.  So 
that  while  Mr.  Lincoln  did  not  require 
negro  suffrage  in  his  plan  of  reconstruc- 
tion, we  here  have  a  solemn  act  of  Con- 
gress absolutely  prohibiting  the  negro 
from  any  participation  in  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  Southern  States.  Now,  how  is 
it  with  Mr.  Johnson?  Mr.  Lincoln  re- 
quired that  they  should  come  back  to  the 
Union  with  constitutions  free  from  slav- 
ery. Mr.  Johnson  has  said  so  time  and 
again — he  said  it  to  the  South  Carolina 
delegation.  He  said  to  the  Freedmen's 
delegation :  'It  is  one  condition  of  the  re- 
admission  of  these  States  that  slavery 
shall  be  forever  extinguished,  and  that  the 
rights  of  the  freedmen  shall  be  preserved 
and  respected.'  I  am  very  glad  to  see  that 
many  of  the  Southern  States  are  making 
commendable  progress  in  this  matter  of 
the  abolition  of  slavery.  I  see  that  the 
convention  in  Alabama  has  adopted  by  83 
to .  3  a  provision  forever  abolishing  and 
prohibiting  slavery  in  that  State — and  not 
only  so,  but  requiring  the  Legislature  to 
make  provision  for  the  protection  of  the 
freedmen  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  civil 
rights.      (Applause.) 

"I  come  now  to  speak  more  properly  on 
the  STibject  of  negro  suffrage.  The  Consti- 
tution of  the  LTnited  States  has  referred 
the  question  of  suffrage  to  the  several 
States.  This  may  have  been  right,  or  it 
may  have  been  wrong.  I  merely  speak  of 
the  subject  as  it  stands,  and  say  that  the 
question  of  suffrage  is  referred  by  the 
Constitution  to  the  several  States.  It  first 
provides  that  such  persons  as  had  a  right 
to  vote  by  the  laws  of  the  State  for  a  mem- 




ber  of  the  most  numerous  branch  of  the 
State  Legislature  should  have  a  right  to 
vote  for  members  of  Congress.  It  then, 
in  another  provision,  declares  that  the 
States  may,  in  any  manner  they  may  see 
proper,  appoint  or  elect  their  presidential 
electors,  so  that  the  whole  question  of  suf- 
frage has,  by  the  Constitution,  from  the 
beginning  been  referred  to  the  several 
States.  Now,  it  has  been  proposed  by 
some  to  avoid  the  operation  of  this  provi- 
sion by  excluding  members  of  Congress 
from  the  Southern  States  until  such  time 
as  they  shall  incorporate  negro  suffrage  in 
their  State  constitutions — to  say  to  them, 
'We  will  keep  you  out  of  your  seats  until 
such  time  as  the  State  from  which  you 
come  shall  amend  its  constitution  so  as  to 
provide  for  negro  suffrage.' 

"This  is  one  way  in  which  to  avoid  the 
force  of  the  constitutional  provisions. 
There  is  another  plan,  and  that  is  the  the- 
ory which  regards  these  States  as  being 
out  of  the  Union  and  holding  them  as  con- 
quered provinces,  subject  to  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  Congress,  like  unorganized  terri- 
tory, saying  that  Congress  has  the  power 
to  provide  for  calling  conventions  in  these 
States,  just  as  in  the  territory  of  Dakota, 
and  may  prescribe  the  right  of  suffrage 
and  determine  who  shall  vote  in  electing 
delegates  To  these  conventions,  just  as  in 
the  territory  of  Dakota;  that  it  may  then 
determine  whether  it  will  accept  the  con- 
stitution offered,  as  might  be  determined 
in  the  case  of  any  other  territory. 

"I  will  not  stop  to  argue  this  question 
at  length,  but  will  say  this,  that  from  the 
beginning  of  the  war  up  to  the  present 
time  every  message  of  the  President,  every 
proclamation,  every  State  paper  and  every 
act  of  Congress  has  proceeded  upon  the 
hypothesis  that  no  State  could  secede  from 
the  Union ;  that  once  in  the  Union,  always 
in  the  Union.  Mr.  Lincoln  in  every  proc- 
lamation went  on  the  principle  that  this 
war  was  an  insurrection — a  rebellion 
against  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of 
the  United  States;  not  a  rebellion  of 
States,  but  a  rebellion  of  the  individuals, 
the  people  of  the  several  Southern  States, 
and  every  man  who  went  into  it  was  per- 
sonally and  individually  responsible  for 
his  acts  and  could  not  shield  himself  under 
the  action  or  authority  of  his  State.  He 
went  on  the  principle  that  every  ordinance 
of  secession,  every  act  of  the  legislatures 
of  the  rebel  States  in  that  direction  was  a 

nullity,  uncon.stitutional  and  void,  having 
no  legal  force  or  effect  whatever,  and  that 
as  these  States  were,  according  to  law,  in 
the  Union,  their  standing  could  not  be  af- 
fected by  the  action  of  the  people — that 
the  people  of  these  States  were  personally 
responsible  for  their  conduct,  just  as  a 
man  is  responsible  who  violates  the  statute 
in  regard  to  the  commission  of  murder, 
and  to  be  treated  as  criminals,  just  as  the 
authorities  thought  proper — that  the  peo- 
ple of  a  State  can  forfeit  their  rights,  but 
so  far  as  their  action  is  concerned,  in  a 
legal  pomt  of  view,  they  had  no  power  to 
affect  the  condition  of  the  State  in  the 
Union.  Every  proclamation  and  every 
act  ot  Congress  have  proceeded  upon  this 
hypothesis.  Mr.  Buchanan  started  out 
with  the  proposition  that  this  was  a  rebel- 
lion of  States.  He  said  we  could  not  co- 
erce a  State.  Our  reply  was,  we  have 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  States,  we 
will  coerce  the  people  of  the  States,  hold- 
ing every  man  responsible  for  his  conduct. 

"This  was  our  answer  to  Mr.  Buchanan. 
Upon  this  hypothesis  we  have  just  put 
down  the  rebellion.  But  it  is  now  pro- 
posed by  some  that  we  shall  practically 
admit  that  the  Southern  States  did  secede 
— that  they  did  go  out  of  the  Union — that 
the  work  of  secession  was  perfect,  was  ac- 
complished— that  the  States  are  out  of  the 
Union — that  a  government  de  facto  was 
established,  and  that  we  now  hold  these 
States  as  conquered  provinces,  just  as  we 
should  hold  Canada  if  we  were  to  invade 
it  and  take  possession  of  it.  As  a  conse- 
quence of  this  doctrine,  Jeff  Davis  can  not 
be  tried  for  treason  because  he  is  not  a 
traitor — not  a  violator  of  the  law,  but  the 
head  of  a  government  de  facto — the  ruler 
of  a  conquered  province,  and  we  have  no 
more  power  to  try  him  for  treason  than 
we  would  to  try  the  Governor  of  Canada 
for  such  an  offense  in  case  he  should  fall 
mto  our  hands  during  a  hostile  invasion 
of  his  territory.  That  is  what  this  doc- 
trine leads  to.  It  leads  to  a  thousand 
other  evils  and  pernicious  things  never 
contemplated  in  the  nature  of  our  Govern- 

"Another  consequence  which  would  flow 
from  the  admission  of  that  doctrine  (and 
I  propose  to  argue  that  at  some  other 
time)  would  be  that  we  would  be  called 
upon  to  pay  the  rebel  debt.  If  we  admit 
that  these  States  were  out  of  the  Union 


19  1 

for  one  moment,  and  we  were  to  be  re- 
garded in  the  light  of  belligerents,  it  would 
be  insisted  upon  at  once  that  when  we 
took  them  back  we  took  them  with  their 
debts,  as  we  would  take  any  other  con- 
quered province  or  State.  I  do  not  pro- 
pose to  argue  that  question  any  further 
at  this  time. 

"The  question  of  negro  suffrage  is  one 
which  threatens  to  divide  us  to  some  ex- 
tent, and  is  surrounded  with  many  prac- 
tical difficulties.  I  reject  in  advance  all 
schemes  of  colonization,  as  they  are  im- 
practicable. We  have  no  right  to  insist 
upon  colonizing  the  negro.  He  is  an 
American,  born  in  this  country,  and  he 
has  no  other  countiy.  When  he  desires  to 
emigrate  he  has  a  perfect  right  to  do  so, 
but  his  emigration  must  depend  upon  his 
own  volition.  I  believe  that  the  time  will 
come  when  every  man  in  the  country, 
white  and  black,  will  have  the  right  of  suf- 
frage, and  that  suffrage  should  not  depend 
upon  color — that  there  is  nothing  in  that 
which  should  make  a  distinction.  I  be- 
lieve that  in  the  process  of  years  every 
man,  whatever  his  color,  whether  in  In- 
diana or  in  South  Carolina,  will  come  to 
enjoy  political  rights.      (Applause.) 

"The  right  to  vote  carries  with  it  the 
right  to  hold  office.  You  cannot  say  that 
the  negro  has  a  natural  right  to  vote,  but 
that  he  must  vote  only  for  white  men  for 
office.  The  right  to  vote  carries  with  it 
the  right  to  be  voted  for.  When  that  right 
is  conferred  you  can  make  no  discrimina- 
tion, no  distinction  against  the  right  to 
hold  office,  and  the  right  to  vote  in  a  State 
carries  with  it  the  right  to  vote  for  Presi- 
dent and  members  of  Congress,  and  for  all 
Federal  officers.  The  right  of  suffrage  be- 
ing conferred  in  South  Carolina,  for  State 
purposes,  under  our  Constitution,  as  I 
have  pointed  out  before,  carries  with  it 
the  right  to  vote  for  President  and  Vice- 
President  and  members  of  Congress. 

"In  regard  to  the  question  of  admitting 
the  freedmen  of  the  Southern  States  to 
vote,  while  I  admit  the  equal  rights  of  all 
men,  and  that  in  time  all  men  will  have 
the  right  to  vote  without  distinction  of 
color  or  race,  I  yet  believe  that  in  the  case 
of  four  millions  of  slaves  just  freed  from 
bondage  there  should  be  a  period  of  pro- 
bation and  preparation  before  they  are 
brought  to  the  exercise  of  political  power. 
Let  us  consider  for  one  moment  the  con- 
dition   of   these   people   in   the   Southern 

States.  You  cannot  judge  of  the  general 
condition  of  the  freedmen  and  negroes 
upon  the  plantation  by  what  we  hear  of 
the  schools  established  at  Hilton  Head, 
Norfolk  and  other  places  where  a  few  en- 
thusiastic and  philanthropic  teachers  are 
instructing  the  negroes.  I  have  no  doubt 
many  of  them  are  making  rapid  progress, 
but  these  are  only  as  one  in  many  thou- 
sands. Ninety-nine  out  of  every  hundred 
of  the  negroes  in  the  South  live  on  the 
plantations,  and  you  cannot  judge  of  the 
condition  of  the  great  mass  by  those  who 
live  in  the  towns.  You  must  consider  the 
condition  of  the  whole  mass.  What  is  that 
condition?  Perhaps  not  one  in  five  hun- 
dred— I  may  say  one  in  a  thousand — can 
read,  and  perhaps  not  one  in  five  hundred 
is  worth  five  dollars  in  property  of  any 
kind.  They  have  no  property,  personal  or 
real.  They  have  just  come  from  bondage 
and  all  they  have  is  their  ov/n  bodies. 

"Their  homes  are  on  the  plantations  of 
these  men,  and  they  must  depend  for  sub- 
sistence on  the  employment  they  receive 
from  them.  Look  at  their  condition.  As 
I  said  before,  only  one  in  five  hundred  can 
read — many  of  them  until  within  the  last 
few  months  were  never  ofi:"  the  plantation ; 
most  of  them  never  out  of  the  county  in 
which  they  live  and  were  born,  except  as 
they  were  driven  by  the  slave  drivers. 
Can  you  conceive  that  a  body  of  men, 
white  or  black,  who  have  been  in  this  con- 
dition, and  their  ancestors  before  them, 
are  qualified  to  be  immediately  lifted  from 
their  present  state  into  the  full  exercise 
of  political  power,  not  only  to  govern 
themselves  and  their  neighbors,  but  to 
take  part  in  the  government  of  the  United 
States?  Can  they  be  regarded  as  intelli- 
gent and  independent  voters?  The  mere 
statement  of  the  fact  furnishes  the  answer 
to  the  question.  To  say  that  such  men — 
and  it  is  no  fault  of  theirs;  it  is  simply 
their  misfortune  and  the  crime  of  the  na- 
tion— to  say  that  such  men,  just  emerging 
from  this  slavery,  are  qualified  for  the 
exercise  of  political  power,  is  to  make  the 
strongest  pro-slavery  argument  I  ever 
heard.  It  is  to  pay  the  highest  compli- 
ment to  the  institution  of  slavery. 

"What  has  been  our  practice  for  many 
years?  We  have  invariably  described 
slavery  as  degrading  to  both  the  body  and 
soul.  We  have  described  it  as  bringing 
human  beings  down  to  the  level  of  the 
beasts  of  the  field.     We  have  described  it 

(  220) 


1  8  1 

19  16 

as  a  crime,  depriving  the  slaves  of  intel- 
lectual and  moral  culture  and  of  all  gifts 
which  God  has  made  the  most  precious. 
If  we  shall  now  turn  around  and  say  that 
this  institution  has  been  a  blessing  to  the 
negro  instead  of  a  curse ;  that  it  has  quali- 
fied him  for  the  right  of  suffrage  and  the 
exercise  of  political  power,  we  shall  stul- 
tify ourselves  and  give  the  lie  to  those  dec- 
larations upon  which  we  have  obtained 
political  power. 

"Let  me  inquii-e  for  a  single  moment,  in 
what  condition  is  Indiana  to  urge  negro 
suffrage  in  South  Carolina,  or  in  any  other 
State?  Let  us  consider  the  position  we 
occupy.  We  have,  perhaps,  twenty-five 
thousand  colored  people  in  this  State. 
Most  of  them  can  read  and  write;  many 
of  them  are  very  intelligent  and  excellent 
citizens,  well-to-do  in  the  world,  well  qual- 
ified to  exercise  the  right  of  suffrage  and 
political  power.  But  how  stands  the  mat- 
ter? We  not  only  exclude  them  from  vot- 
ing, we  exclude  them  from  testifying  in 
the  courts  of  justice.  We  exclude  them 
from  our  public  schools  and  make  it  un- 
lawful and  a  crime  for  them  to  come  into 
the  State  of  Indiana  at  any  time  subse- 
quent to  18-50.  No  negro  who  has  come 
into  our  State  since  1850  can  make  a  valid 
contract ;  he  cannot  acquire  title  to  a  piece 
of  land  because  the  law  makes  the  deed 
void,  and  every  man  who  gives  him  em- 
ployment is  liable  to  prosecution  and  fine. 
I  sent  out  the  Twenty-eighth  Indiana  col- 
ored regiment,  recruited  with  great  diffi- 
culty and  at  some  expense.  It  has  been 
in  the  field  two  years.  It  has  fought  well 
on  many  occasions  and  won  the  high  opin- 
ion of  officers  who  have  seen  it.  We  got 
credit  on  our  State  quota  for  every  man 
who  went  out.  Yet,  according  to  the  Con- 
stitution and  laws  of  Indiana  more  than 
one-half  of  the  men  in  that  regiment  have 
no  right  to  come  back  again,  and  if  they 
do  come  back  they  are  subject  to  prosecu- 
tion and  fine ;  and  any  man  who  receives 
them  or  employs  them  is  also  liable  to  pun- 
ishment. Now,  can  Indiana,  in  this  con- 
dition— with  twenty-five  thousand  colored 
men  in  her  borders,  to  whom  she  denies 
suffrage  and  political  power,  and  almost 
all  civil  rights,  with  what  face,  I  say,  can 
Indiana  go  to  Congress  and  insist  upon 
giving  the  right  of  suffrage  to  the  negroes 
in  the  Southern  States  ?  If  her  Congress- 
men ask  to  no  this  they  will  naturally  be 
asked  in  turn,  'What  have  you  done  with 

ihese  people  in  your  own  State?  You  have 
nad  them  for  many  years.  You  have  long 
had  an  opportunity  to  make  this  issue  as 
to  whether  they  ought  to  have  these 
rights.  Their  mental  and  moral  condition 
is  much  superior  to  that  of  the  great  mass 
of  the  freedmen  in  the  Southern  States.' 

"What  have  you  done?  You  have  done 
nothing.  I  ask  you,  what  would  be  the 
moral  strength  of  any  politician  present- 
ing these  questions  in  Congress?  I  ask  how 
any  member  of  Congress  from  Indiana, 
who  has  not  made  the  issue  at  home,  can 
present  himself  and  urge  the  right  of  Con- 
gress to  enfranchise  the  negroes  in  the 
Southern  States?  It  may  be  said  that 
there  are  only  a  few  of  them  in  Indiana, 
and  it  is  noc  important.  But  if  the  few 
who  are  here  have  a  right,  moral  or  nat- 
ural, to  the  franchise,  when  you  refuse  it 
to  the  few  you  refuse  it  to  all.  When  you 
refuse  it  to  25,000  you  violate  sound  prin- 
ciples just  as  much  as  if  you  refuse  it  to 
five  millions.  I  tell  you  these  Northern 
States  can  never  command  any  moral 
force  on  that  subject  until  they  shall  first 
be  just  to  the  negroes  at  home. 
*       *       * 

"If  you  enfranchise  all  the  negroes  in 
these  States  you  will  have  at  least  twenty 
negro  votes  to  one  white  vote,  and  in  the 
work  of  reconstructing  the  States  of 
South  Carolina,  Alabama  and  Florida  you 
would  have  a  larger  proportion — perhaps 
thirty  colored  votes  to  one  white  vote. 
Now,  I  ask  you,  what  is  to  be  the  eflfect  of 
that?  The  first  effect  would  be  to  erect 
colored  State  governments.  Under  such  a 
condition  of  things  the  negro  would  no 
more  vote  for  a  white  man  than  you  would 
vote  for  a  black  man.  They  would  no 
more  elect  a  white  man  than  they  would 
elect  a  black  man.  Human  nature  is  the 
same,  whether  in  a  white  or  colored  skin. 
There  would  be  nothing  that  would  confer 
more  pleasure  upon  a  man  of  that  race, 
of  course,  than  the  elevation  to  political 
power  of  a  man  of  his  own  race  and  color. 
Having  secured  power,  they  would  retort 
upon  us  that  which  we  have  so  steadily 
practiced  upon  them.  If  you  give  them 
the  votes  they  will  elect  men  of  their  own 
color.  And  we  would  have  no  right  to 
blame  them.  We  would  think  rather  bad- 
ly of  them  if  they  did  not.  I  would  ask 
you  if  the  negroes  of  Hayti,  or  any  other 
place  where  they  are  in  the  majority,  have 
ever  elected  a  white  man  to  oflSce?    Under 



Mr.  Sumner's  plan  you  will  give  them  an 
overwhelming  majority  in  every  one  of 
these  States,  and  you  will  give  them  the 
political  power  of  the  South.  That  they 
will  exercise  that  power  by  electing  men 
of  their  own  color  is  absolutely  certain. 
Believing  that  human  nature  is  the  same 
under  different  complexions,  that  the  ne- 
groes are  not  differently  constituted  from 
ourselves,  and  that  they  have  like  passions 
with  us,  we  cannot  doubt  how  this  power 
will  be  exercised. 

"Some  -will  say  that  if  they  can  find 
colored  men  qualified,  all  right.  There 
are  enough  colored  men  of  education  in 
the  North  to  go  South  and  fill  every  office 
there,  and  I  have  no  doubt  they  stand 
ready  to  do  it.  Here  we  deny  them  almost 
every  right,  except  that  of  personal  lib- 
erty, and  it  is  so  in  Illinois  and  some  of 
the  other  Northern  States;  and  when  you 
present  to  them  the  prospect  of  holding 
the  highest  offices  in  the  gift  of  the  people 
of  the  Southern  States,  rest  assured  they 
will  embrace  it.  They  will  have  colored 
Governors,  and  colored  members  of  Con- 
gress, and  Senators  and  Judges  of  the  Su- 
preme Court,  etc.  Very  well;  and  sup- 
pose they  do  send  colored  Senators  and 
Representatives  to  Congress?  I  have  no 
doubt  you  will  find  men  in  the  North  will- 
ing to  sit  beside  them,  and  will  not  think 
themselves  degraded  by  doing  so.  I  have 
nothing  to  say  to  this.  I  am  simply  dis- 
cussing the  political  effect  of  it.  In  every 
State  where  there  is  a  colored  State  gov- 
ernment, a  negro  for  Governor  and  a  ne- 
gro for  Supreme  Judge,  white  emigration 
will  cease.  There  will  be  no  more  white 
emigration  to  any  such  State.  You  cannot 
find  the  most  ardent  anti-slavery  man  in 
Wayne  county  who  will  go  and  locate  in 
a  State  that  has  colored  State  govern- 
ment. You  will  absolutely  shut  off  at  once, 
and  effectually,  too,  all  emigration  from 
the  Northern  States,  and  from  Europe, 
too,  whenever  that  event  shall  happen. 
Thus  they  will  remain  permanently  col- 
ored States  in  the  South.  The  white  men 
who  are  now  there  would  remove  from 
them  and  would  not  remain  under  such 

"Very  well,  say  some,  that  is  all  very 
well  if  we  can  get  the  negroes  to  go  there. 
But  let  me  say  that  in  such  case  the  col- 
ored States  would  be  a  balance  of  power 
in  this  country.  I  ask,  is  it  desirable  to 
have  a  colored  State  government?     I  say 

it  is  not.  It  is  not  for  many  reasons.  One 
reason  is,  that  such  States  would  contin- 
ually constitute  a  balance  of  power.  They 
would  be  bound  together  by  the  strongest 
tie  that  ever  binds  men  together — the  tie 
of  color  and  race — the  tie  of  a  down-trod- 
den and  despised  race.  As  three  hundred 
thousand  slave  holders  by  a  common  tie 
were  able  to  govern  this  nation  for  a  long 
time,  so  four  millions  of  people,  bound  to- 
gether by  a  much  stronger  tie — despised 
by  the  whole  world  as  they  have  been — 
would  constantly  vote  to  act  together  and 
their  united  vote  would  constitute  a  bal- 
ance of  power  that  might  control  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  nation. 

"I  submit,  then,  however  clearly  and 
strongly  we  may  admit  the  natural  rights 
of  the  negro — I  submit  to  the  intelligence 
of  the  people — that  colored  State  govern- 
ments are  not  desirable;  that  they  will 
bring  about  results  that  are  not  to  be 
hoped  for;  that  finally  they  would  threat- 
en to  bring  about,  and,  I  believe,  would 
result  in  a  war  of  races. 

"Now  the  question  comes  up,  how  can 
this  thing  be  avoided  and  yet  confer  upon 
the  negro  his  rights?  Well,  if  I  had  the 
power  I  will  tell  you  how  I  would  avoid 
it.  I  believe  it  will  be  the  way  in  which 
it  will  be  ultimately  worked  out,  for  I  be- 
lieve the  time  will  come  when  these  rebel 
States  will  confer  upon  the  negro  the  right 
of  suffrage.  If  I  had  the  power  I  would 
arrange  it  in  this  way:  I  would  give  these 
men  just  emerged  from  slavery  a  pei'iod 
of  probation  and  preparation;  I  would 
give  them  time  to  acquire  a  little  property 
and  get  a  little  education;  time  to  learn 
something  about  the  simplest  fonns  of 
business  and  prepare  themselves  for  the 
exercise  of  political  rights.  By  that  time 
these  Southern  States  will  have  been  so 
completely  filled  up  by  immigration  from 
the  North  and  from  Europe  that  the  ne- 
groes will  be  in  permanent  minority. 
Why?  Because  the  negroes  have  no  immi- 
gration— nothing  but  the  natural  increase 
— while  we  have  immigration  from  all  the 
world,  and  natural  increase  besides.  Thus, 
by  postponing  the  thing  only  until  such 
time  as  the  negroes  are  qualified  to  enjoy 
political  rights,  the  dangers  I  have  been 
considering  would  have  fully  passed  away. 
Their  influence  would  no  longer  be  dan- 
gerous in  the  manner  I  have  indicated  and 
a  conflict  of  races  would  not  be  more  like- 
ly to  happen  there  than  it  now  is  in  Mas- 



19  16 

sachusetts.  In  Massachusetts  the  negroes 
have  exercised  political  rights  for  twenty- 
five  years,  and  yet  there  has  been  no  dis- 
turbance there — no  conflict  of  races. 
Why?  Because  the  negroes  have  been  in 
the  minority.  They  cannot  elect  a  man  of 
their  own  color  to  any  office  to  bring  up 
that  prejudice  of  race.  I  believe  what  I 
have  stated  will  be  the  way  in  which  the 
question  will  work  itself  out.  But,  under 
the  policy  of  Mr.  Sumner,  we  are  to  ex- 
clude twenty  out  of  every  twenty-one  men 
in  the  Southern  States  and  bring  forward 
colored  voters  to  fill  the  places  of  those 
excluded.  The  inevitable  result  of  that 
policy  would  be  to  establish  colored  State 
governments  and  a  colored  balance  of 
power  in  this  Republic,  a  thing  which  I 
think  most  desirable  to  avoid." 

That  the  Republicans  of  Indiana,  under 
the  leadership  of  Governor  Morton,  cher- 
ished a  high  regard  for  Andrew  Johnson 
is  evidenced  by  this  plank  in  their  State 
platform,  adopted  in  February,  1864: 

"Resolved,  That  the  gratitude  of  the 
American  people  is  due  to  Andrew  John- 
son of  Tennessee  for  his  unselfish  devotion 
to  the  cause  of  the  Union,  and  his  patriotic 
and  successful  eff'orts  for  the  overthrow 
of  the  rebellion,  and  that  we  present  his 
name  as  the  choice  of  our  people  for  the 
Vice-Presidency  of  the  United  States." 

At  the  Republican  State  Convention 
held  in  February,  1866,  these  resolutions 
were  given  precedence  in  the  platform 
adopted  by  the  Indiana  Republicans: 

"Resolved,  That  we  have  full  faith  in 
President  Johnson  and  his  Cabinet,  and 
in  the  Union  members  of  both  houses  of 
Congress,  and  in  the  sincere  desire  and 
determination  of  all  of  them  to  conduct 
the  affairs  of  the  Government  in  such 
manner  as  to  secure  the  best  interests  of 
the  whole  people;  and  we  hereby  declare 
that  we  will  sustain  them  in  all  constitu- 
tional efforts  to  restore  peace,  order  and 
permanent  union. 

"Resolved,  That  in  Andrew  Johnson, 
President  of  the  United  States,  we  recog- 
nize a  patriot  true,  and  a  statesman  tried ; 
that  we  will  support  him  in  all  his  consti- 
tutional efforts  to  restore  national  author- 
ity, law  and  order  among  the  people  of  the 
States  lately  in  rebellion,  on  the  basis  of 
equal  and  exact  justice  to  all  men;  and 

that  we  pledge  to  the  administration,  ex- 
ecutive and  legislative,  our  united  and 
hearty  co-operation  in  all  wise  and  pru- 
dent measures  devised  for  the  security  of 
the  Government  against  rebellion  and  in- 
surrection in  times  to  come. 

"Resolved,  That  whilst  we  endorse  the 
President  of  the  United  States  in  his  con- 
stitutional efforts  for  the  safety  of  the 
Union,  and  the  restoration  of  law  and  or- 
der, we  do  hereby  express  our  entire  confi- 
dence in  the  Union  majority  in  Congress 
and  pledge  to  it  our  cordial  support. 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  the  province  of 
the  legislative  branch  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment to  detennine  the  question  of  re- 
construction of  the  States  lately  in  rebel- 
lion against  that  Government;  and  that, 
in  the  exercise  of  that  power.  Congress 
should  have  in  view  the  loyalty  of  the  peo- 
ple in  those  States,  their  devotion  to  the 
Constitution,  and  obedience  to  the  laws; 
and  until  the  people  of  those  States,  by 
their  acts,  prove  themselves  loyal  to  the 
Government,  they  should  not  be  restored 
to  the  rights  and  position  enjoyed  and 
occupied  by  them  before  their  rebellion." 

This  endorsement  of  President  Johnson 
was  unstintedly  given  five  months  after 
the  delivery  of  Governor  Morton's  incisive 
speech  at  Richmond,  and  doubtless  re- 
flected the  views  of  the  Republican  party 
at  that  time,  although  there  had  been  some 
criticism  of  Morton's  views  by  the  radical 
element,  led  by  Geo.  W.  Julian  and  other 
champions  of  abolitionism. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  while  the  Re- 
publicans carried  Indiana  by  20,000  major- 
ity in  1864  and  by  14,000  in  1866,  their 
majority  at  the  October  election  in  1868 
dwindled  down  to  a  little  over  one  thou- 
sand. The  defenders  of  the  Union  who 
survived  the  vicissitudes  of  camp  life, 
forced  marches,  and  the  carnage  of  battle, 
had  returned  to  their  firesides  and  re- 
sumed their  peaceful  occupations,  evident- 
ly did  not  take  kindly  to  the  repudiation  of 
the  principles  espoused  by  Governor  Mor- 
ton at  Richmond  in  1865,  else  the  Repub- 
lican majorities  would  not  have  melted 
av,  ay  as  they  did.  No  inconsiderable  num- 
ber of  Republicans  refused  to  exchange 
Lincolnism  for  Jacobinism. 

(  223  ) 

[Chapter  XXX.] 



(By   Major  Geo.   E.   Finney,   Editor  Martinsville   Democrat.) 

ATRIOTISM  is  a  positive  quali- 
ty. It  is  the  foundation  stone 
on  which  rests  the  integrity  of 
a  nation.  It  binds,  cements, 
conserves  in  unity  and  strength 
the  institutions  of  a  people. 
Without  it  no  nation  could 
be  strong,  nor  long  preserve  its  autono- 
my —  could  long  enjoy  internal  peace 
or  external  comity.  The  love  of  country 
is  not  a  natural  gift,  but  comes  from  rea- 
son. Habit,  observation  and  education  at- 
tach us  to  it,  and  not  instinct.  In  a  re- 
public such  as  ours  partisanism  may  grow 
so  strong  as  to  weaken  patriotism,  and 
though  parties  are  necessary  to  preserve  a 
just  equilibrium  between  diverging  inter- 
ests, their  tendency  to  weaken  patriotism 
should  be  guarded  against  with  extreme 
care,  and  this  is  a  lesson  not  taught  with 
sufficient  pertinacity.  To  illustrate  this 
fact  it  is  only  necessary  to  present  the 
political  state  of  the  public  mind  just  previ- 
ous to  the  outbreak  of  the  civil  war, 
and  which  in  the  same  words  will  give  the 
reader  and  student  of  today  a  clearer  view 
of  the  deep  strength  of  patriotism  that 
characterized  the  Democrat  of  the  North 
of  that  day,  inducing  him  to  enlist  himself 
in  the  cause  destined  to  preserve  intact  the 
national  existence  of  the  Union,  and  to 
offer  life  if  need  be  to  thwart  the  purpose 
of  those  who  for  partisan  ends  would  dis- 
member it. 

Persons  living  since  that  great  political 
crisis  cannot  form  a  correct  opinion  of  the 
condition  of  the  public  mind  in  that  day, 
which  is  necessary  to  a  full  appreciation 
of  the  strength  of  patriotism  that  actuated 
the  hosts  of  Indiana  Democrats  in  seizing 

the  implements  of  war  to  repel  a  large  sec- 
tional contingent  of  their  own  party  in  an 
insane  purpose  to  destroy  the  Union. 

In  the  year  before  the  breaking  out  of 
the  war  there  had  been  a  most  exciting 
political  campaign  and  election.  But  for 
two  or  three  years  previous  to  that  cam- 
paign there  had  been  heated  discussions  in 
the  press,  on  the  rostrum  and  amongst  the 
citizens  of  communities  over  the  then  lead- 
ing political  question  of  the  dissolution  of 
the  Union.  Naturally  the  Democrats  were 
put  on  the  defensive  for  the  reason  that 
Southern  Democrats,  almost  wholly,  were 
the  propagandists  of  this  destructive  proj- 
ect. Before  any  overt  acts  were  essayed, 
the  question  was  regarded  purely  political, 
and  the  Democrats  of  the  North  were  dis- 
posed towards  defending  by  palliating  the 
declarations  and  purpose  of  their  Southern 
political  kinsmen — their  position  being  in 
the  main  that  the  threat  had  a  political 
aim  intended  to  thwart  the  political  pur- 
pose of  the  abolition  sentiment  of  the 
North,  the  abolitionists  being  held  the 
aggressors.  In  this  period  came  the 
notable  national  discussion  in  Illinois  be- 
tween Lincoln  and  Douglas,  in  which  slav- 
ery was  the  prominent  feature.  This 
brought  the  subject  to  every  community 
in  the  country,  and  it  was  the  fire-brand 
that  set  the  mind  ablaze.  So  that,  when 
the  campaign  of  1860  came,  the  people 
were  at  swords'  points — crazed  with  the 
subject,  and  allowed  their  minds  to  run  to 
excess  of  wild  exclamation  and  abuse. 
Taunts  and  jeers  were  hurled  and  op- 
probrious epithets  were  applied,  and  soon 
personal  assaults  were  indulged  in  when 
the  war  actually  came.  The  Democratic 
party  had  split  into  several  fragments  in 

8— History 



the  campaign,  leaving  the  Republicans  to 
an  easy  victory  in  the  national  election, 
and  as  between  this  event  and  the  action  of 
the  electoral  college  overt  acts  of  dissolu- 
tion had  become  history,  the  seceding 
States  were  not  represented,  and  the 
Democratic  party  was  torn  into  shreds. 
Previous  to  this  quick  succession  of  polit- 
ical events  there  had  been  nothing  to  call 
out  the  latent  patriotism  of  either  Demo- 
crats or  Republicans.  But  now,  to  use  the 
words,  later,  of  President  Cleveland,  a  con- 
dition and  not  a  theory  confronted  us. 
Partisanism  was  thrown  aside  and  patriot- 
ism vivified  in  the  heart ;  and  though  still 
upbraided,  taunted,  jeered  by  the  Repub- 
licans in  the  mad  flush  of  a  political  vic- 
tory, Democrats  flocked  to  the  standard 
with  the  first  call  to  arms  and  remained 
active  under  it  through  the  bloody  years 
until  "the  war  drums  throbbed  no  longer." 
The  patriotism  that  stirred  men  to  action 
under  these  circumstances  must  have  been 
deep  and  abiding,  and  that  kept  them  in 
service  throughout  the  war,  and  to  those 
who  thus  proved  the  possession  of  unselfish 
love  of  country,  a  greater  meed  of  praise  is 
due  than  has  often  been  accorded  them. 
Let  the  writer  hereof  lay  this  humble 
tribute-wreath  upon  the  brows  of  those 
Democrats,  living  and  dead:  In  the  face 
of  most  ungenerous  abuse  and  contumely, 
with  a  patriotism  untarnished  by  any  base 
sentiment  and  under  the  highest  motives 
that  can  animate  loyalty,  they  "saw  their 
duty  and  did  it." 

In  distinctive  contrast  with  the  attitude 
towards  Democrats  of  the  great  body  of 
Republicans,  President  Lincoln  held  a 
clearer  view  and  a  juster  judgment  as  to 
his  duty  to  the  country,  and  his  purpose 
of  reclamation  of  the  severed  Union.  To 
solidify  the  North  in  the  struggle  and  to 
show  that  unlike  his  party  generally  he 
felt  sure  of  the  patriotism  of  the  Northern 
Democrats,  correctly  judging  them  by  his 
own  high  purpose  of  preserving  the  unity 
of  the  States,  he  sought  them  out  and  con- 
ferred upon  them  high  and  responsible  po- 

sitions. And  it  is  yet  to  be  learned  of  an 
incident  where  they  betrayed  the  trust. 
McClellan  commanded  the  army ;  he  was  a 
Democrat.  Grant  was  selected  from  a 
score  of  men,  and  put  in  command  of  the 
great  armies  of  the  North ;  he  was  a  Demo- 
crat, changing  his  political  views  and  be- 
coming a  Republican  not  until  the  war 
closed,  and  in  the  initial  days  of  the  recon- 
struction period.  The  superb  Hancock, 
who  held  back  the  South  on  that  blood- 
stained ridge  at  Gettysburg;  a  Democrat 
he,  and  a  gallant  soldier  and  heart-whole 
patriot  besides.  Franz  Sigel,  Democrat, 
was  made  a  general  and  given  command  of 
a  force,  that  with  the  wiry  German  at  its 
head,  became  an  idol  of  both  our  German 
and  American  citizenship;  Sigel  was  also 
prominent  in  civil  life — elected  Register  of 
the  city  of  New  York  in  1871,  and  was 
Pension  Agent  for  the  New  York  depart- 
ment, appointed  by  President  Cleveland 
during  his  first  term.  The  Irish,  too,  were 
represented  in  the  fighting  General  James 
Shields  of  Illinois,  a  Democrat,  a  statesman 
as  well  as  soldier,  who  also  served  the  coun- 
try as  a  United  States  Senator,  holding 
that  office  in  succession  from  three  differ- 
ent States — Illinois,  Minnesota  and  Mis- 
souri. However,  it  was  never  necessary  to 
"show  him,"  whether  in  the  Senate,  as 
Governor  of  the  Oregon  Territory  or  as  a 
soldier  in  the  field.  He  knew.  This  list 
might  be  extended  greatly,  but  these  names 
are  sufficient  to  show  the  unselfish  loyalty 
of  the  Democracy,  both  native  and  foreign 
born,  as  well  as  the  wisdom  that  character- 
ized the  great  President,  Lincoln. 

And  many  Indiana  Democratic  soldiers 
— generals,  colonels,  and  men  in  the  ranks 
— with  hearts  that  beat  in  unison  with  the 
grand  strains  of  "My  Country,  'Tis  of 
Thee,"  marched  and  slept  and  suffered  and 
fought  in  the  miasmatic  swamps,  and 
under  the  festoons  of  the  gray  Spanish 
moss ;  on  the  turbid  waters  of  the  Missis- 
sippi; in  the  trenches  at  Vicksburg;  in 
Mobile  bay;  at  Stone's  River;  at  Resaca; 
on   the   storm-swept   sands   of   Hatteras; 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

with  Sherman  on  the  march  to  the  sea; 
even  challenging  the  guns  above  the  clouds 
on  Missionary  Ridge;  at  the  bloody  angle 
and  on  the  ridge  at  Gettysburg;  in  the 
swamps  of  the  Chickahominy ;  working, 
watching  and  waiting  in  the  trenches  at 
Petersburg  and  Richmond;  on  the  fields  all 
over  the  South,  as  well  as  on  the  ensan- 
guined plains  in  front  of  Washington.  And 
everywhere  they  wrote  a  record  of  brave 
and  faithful  service,  the  great  thought 
that  animated  their  souls  being  to  reclaim 
and  preserve  the  Union.  On  every  field 
they  paid  the  price  of  devotion  to  a  lofty 
patriotism  by  the  ineflfable  sacrifice.  Why 
not  then  be  placed  on  their  brows  in  mem- 
ory a  wreath  bearing  the  legend — and  no 
greater  praise  can  be  bestowed  on  man — 
"They  saw  their  duty  and  did  it."  And 
the  men  that  stood  beside  them,  yet  es- 
caped the  cruel  shaft,  and  who  devoted 
their  lives  since  to  the  upbuilding  and  re- 
habilitation of  the  country  that  was  left 
torn  and  blood-stained — with  broken 
bones  and  saddened  mothers,  bereft  of 
sons  or  husbands — are  no  less  entitled  to 
like  honor  and  praise  from  those  who  en- 
joy the  fruits  of  their  well-directed  labors 
in  the  dark  days  of  America. 


A  good  deal  was  said  during  and  after 
the  civil  war  in  regard  to  the  "equivocal 
attitude"  assumed  and  maintained  by 
Thomas  A.  Hendricks  with  reference  to 
the  m.ethods  of  bringing  about  the  sup- 
pression of  the  rebellion.  Mr.  Hendricks 
was  reluctant  to  talk  about  his  record,  pre- 
ferring that  it  speak  for  itself  rather  than 
that  he  devote  his  time  to  defending  it. 
However,  at  the  close  of  the  exciting 
Cleveland  and  Hendricks  campaign  of 
1884  occasion  presented  itself  for  depart- 
ing from  his  established  custom.  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  Democratic  Veteran  As- 

sociation of  Indiana,  headed  by  Capt.  Wm. 
R.  Myers  of  Anderson,  called  at  the  hos- 
pitable home  of  Mr.  Hendricks  December 
4,  1884,  to  pay  their  i-espects  to  the  twice- 
elected  vice-president  who  had  eight  years 
previously  been  chosen  by  a  popular  ma- 
jority of  a  quarter  of  a  million  votes  but 
who,  with  Tilden,  was  denied  occupancy 
of  the  office  to  which  he  had  been  assigned 
by  the  people.  In  eloquent  words  Captain 
Myeis  paid  tribute  to  the  high  character 
and  the  sterling  worth  of  Governor  Hen- 
dricks, in  reply  to  which  the  latter  re- 
sponded in  this  direct  manner  and  in  these 
incisive  terms : 

"Captain  Myers,  I  am  very  much  grati- 
fied that  you  have  been  made  the  medium 
by  your  comrades  to  express  to  me  the 
sentiments  of  your  own  .speech,  and  of  the 
address  of  the  Association.  You  would 
distrust  my  sincerity  were  I  to  say  I  am 
not  gratified  at  the  honor  you  have  done 
me.  The  congratulations  from  you  and 
your  comrades  are  especially  gratifying 
when  I  consider  the  fact  that  you  and  I 
shared  in  the  contest  of  last  summer, 
which  I  regard  as  the  greatest  of  all  polit- 
ical contests  in  this  country  with  which 
1  have  been  acquainted,  and  that  we  have 
come  out  of  that  sharing  alike  in  its  re- 
sponsibilities and  its  glory.  You  have  re- 
ferred to  one  characteristic  of  the  contest 
which  I  hope  never  to  see  repeated  in  our 
country.  The  personal  attacks  and  slan- 
der that  have  been  indulged  in  were  un- 
worthy of  American  politics.  I  have  never 
referred  to  any  of  these,  .so  far  as  they 
personally  concern  myself,  during  the 
campaign,  and  will  only  do  so  now  very 
briefly.  During  the  first  month  of  the 
war  I  found  it  necessary  to  correct  one 
of  these  misrepresentations,  and  at  that 
time  used  the  following  language : 

Since  the  war  commenced  I  have  uniformly  said 
that  the  authority  of  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  is  not  questioned  in  Indiana,  and  I 
regard  it  as  the  duty  of  the  citizens  of  Indiana  to 
respect  and  maintain  that  authority,  and  to  give 
the  Government  an  earnest  support  in  the  prose- 
cution of  the  war,  until  in  the  province  of  God  it 
may  be  brought  to  an  honorable  conclusion  and  the 
blessings  of  peace  restored  to  our  country,  post- 
poning until  that  time  all  controversy  in  relation 
to  the  causes  and  responsibilities  of  the  war.  No 
man  vnVl  feel  a  deeper  solicitude  for  the  Indiana 
soldiers  as  long  as  the  conflict  remains  to  which 
they  are  called,  than  myself. 

(  227) 

HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  — 1816-1 

"The  sentiments  then  expressed  guided 
my  conduct  throughout  the  war.  One  of 
the  political  leaders  of  the  times  charged 
that  I  failed  in  my  duty  in  having  opposed 
the  law  for  the  drafts.  To  opposition  to 
the  draft  I  must  plead  guilty.  I  favored 
an  army  of  volunteers,  encouraged  by  suit- 
able bounties ;  and  during  the  first  month 
of  my  service  in  the  Senate  I  said  that  I 
desired  to  express  the  opinion  that  Con- 
gress should  encourage  volunteering, 
rather  than  rely  on  what  many  deemed  an 
unpopular  measure  of  the  Government, 
namely,  a  draft.  I  did  not  regard  the 
draft  as  a  reliable  support  for  the  army. 
Prior  to  that  time  125,000  had  been 
drafted,  6,000  entered  service  under  the 
draft,  10,000  substitutes  were  furnished, 
and  20,000  M'ere  induced  to  volunteer  by 
the  bounties  that  these  commutations  en- 
abled the  department  to  pay.  The  draft 
of  125,000  resulted  in  36,600. soldiers  in 
the  field.  I  believed  then,  as  I  have  be- 
lieved ever  since,  that  volunteers,  encour- 
aged by  suitable  bounties,  relieving  them 
from  anxiety  about  providing  for  their 
homes,  gave  the  best  assurance  of  support 
to  the  army.  The  same  politician  to  whom 
I  have  referred,  speaking  of  myself,  said : 
'He  did  not  vote  in  favor  of  any  measure 
that  looked  to  cariying  on  the  war.'  I 
will  refer  to  but  two  acts  of  mine  in  the 
Senate  in  answer  to  that  statement.  On 
the  23d  of  April,  1864,  I  offered  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Appropriation  Bill,  to  increase 

the  pay  of  the  soldiers  and  non-commis- 
sioned oflScers  reasonably  in  proportion  to 
the  then  depreciated  condition  of  the  cur- 
rency. I  thought  that  proposition  was 
an  encouragement  to  the  army  and  to  en- 
listments, and  I  may  say  that  Colonel 
Lane,  then  my  colleague  in  the  Senate, 
voted  with  me  on  that  subject.  On  the 
same  day  I  voted  for  the  great  Appro- 
priation Bill  for  the  army,  for  the  year 
from  June  30,  1864  to  June  30,  1865— 
I  believe  the  largest  Appropriation  Bill 
ever  cassed  by  this  Government — voting 
$530,000,000;  and  under  that  appropria- 
tion the  army  was  carried  to  the  close  of 
the  war;  under  it  many  of  the  battles 
were  fought,  and  under  it  Sherman 
marched  to  the  sea,  and  the  surrender 
was  made  to  Grant." 

Vice-President-elect  Hendricks  closed 
by  expressing  his  gratification  at  meeting 
the  Democratic  Soldiers  and  Sailors'  Vet- 
eran Association  of  Indiana  on  this  oc- 
casion and  in  his  own  home,  and  tendered 
them  his  thanks,  not  only  for  the  honor 
they  had  done  him,  but  for  the  support 
they  had  given  him  in  the  great  contest 
then  just  closed. 

(For  obvious  reasons  it  is  deemed  fitting 
to  give  this  instructive  information  in  this 
part  of  the  History  instead  of  farther  back 
in  its  regular  or  chronological  order.) 

[Chapter  XXXI.] 



and  to  the  infinite  delight  of  the  assem- 
bled multitude  that  champion  of  popular 
rights  pitilessly  exposed  the  tyrannical 
program  of  the  Jacobins  then  in  the  sad- 
dle and  appealed  eloquently  to  the  sense 
of  justice  that  has  ever  been  assumed  to 
serve  as  a  guidance  to  a  fair-minded  and 
justice-loving  people.  Great  outbursts  of 
applause  punctuated  the  able  and  eloquent 
address  of  Mr.  Voorhees. 

ml  HE    Democratic    State    Conven- 
tion of  1866  partook  somewhat 
of  the  character  of  a  reunion 
and  a  love  feast.     It  vi^as  held 
— '   at  Indianapolis,  March  15.    The 

night  before  a  largely  at- 
tended meeting  was  held  at  the 
old  State  House,  packed  to  capacity. 
This  meeting  was  presided  over  by  An- 
drew Humphreys,  of  Greene  county. 
Speeches  of  a  more  or  less  inspiring  and 
inspiriting  character  were  made  by  Jason 
B.  Brov/n  of  Seymour,  Colonel  Isaiah  B. 
McDonald  of  Columbia  City,  Judge  Robert 
Lowry  of  Goshen,  Cyrus  S.  McNutt  of 
Martinsville,  Colonel  J.  W.  Blake  of  Indi- 
anapolis, and  Judge  D.  T.  Laird  of 

The  convention  proper  was  called  to  or- 
der by  State  Chairman  Joseph  J.  Bing- 
ham. Colonel  Cyrus  L.  Dunham,  of  New 
Albany,  was  chosen  temporary  and  after- 
ward permanent  chairman.  In  his  cus- 
tomary forceful  style  the  presiding  officer 
addressed  the  assembly  on  the  issues  of 
the  day,  presenting  strong  points  in  sup- 
port of  the  policies  advocated  by  the  De- 
mocracy and  giving  due  credit  to  Presi- 
dent Andrew  Johnson  in  seeking  to  re- 
establish harmonious  relations  between 
North  and  South. 

So  deeply  interested  was  the  convention 
in  listening  to  the  words  of  truth  and  wis- 
dom as  they  fell  from  the  lips  of  Colonel 
Dunham  that  at  the  close  of  his  masterly 
effort  insistent  demand  was  made  for 
more  oratoiy.  Naturally  the  delegates 
turned  their  faces  to  where  the  "Tall  Syca- 
more of  the  Wabash"  was  seated.  Loud 
calls  for  Voorhees  brought  that  master  of 
oratory  to  his  feet.  At  considerable  length 


1.  George  E.  Greene,  Knox  county. 

2.  Levi  Sparks,  Clark. 

3.  B.  F.  Jones,  Bartholomew. 

4.  William  S.  Hall,  Rush. 

5.  W.  P.  Applegate,  Fayette. 

6.  W.  H.  Talbott,  Aquilla  Jones,  R.  H.  Hall, 

Valentine  Butsch,  William  S.  Jennings. 

7.  Thomas  Dowling,  Vigo. 

8.  L.  B.  Stockton,  Tippecanoe. 

9.  Thomas  D.  Lemon,  Laporte. 

10.  Thomas  Davenport,  Kosciusko. 

11.  James  Sweetzer,  Grant. 

Secretary  of  State — General  Mahlon  D.  Manson, 

Auditor — Christian  G.  Badger,  Clark. 
Treasurer — James  B.  Ryan,  Marion. 
Attorney-General — John  R.  Coffroth,  Huntington. 
Superintendent     of     Public     Instruction— R.     M. 

Chapman,  Knox. 


"Resolved,  That  among  the  powers  re- 
served to  the  States,  that  of  withdrawal 
at  will  from  the  Union  cannot  be  found, 
and  consequently,  such  doctrine  can  be 
asserted  only  as  a  revolutionaiy  measure, 
and  not  peaceably  as  a  right ;  and  the  late 
action  of  the  Southern  people,  in  resorting 
to  such  means  as  a  mode  of  redress  of 
grievances,  was  illegal,  and  had  no  sus- 
taining principle  but  that  of  physical 
force,  and  that,  having  proved  insufficient, 
those  principles  became  remitted  to  their 


HISTORY      INDIANA      DEMOCRACY  —  1816-1916 

constitutional  obligations  or  rights,  of 
which  obedience  and  protection  are  chief. 

"Resolved.  That  the  principles  avowed 
by  President  Johnson  in  his  annual  mes- 
sage, looking  to  the  early  practical  resto- 
ration of  all  the  States  to  their  rights  in 
the  Union,  meets  with  our  hearty  ap- 
proval; and  the  action  of  the  majority 
in  Congress,  dictated  as  it  may  be  by  re- 
venge, fanaticism,  or  thirst  for  political 
power,  and  being  exerted  to  thrust  such 
States  out  of  the  Union,  we  solemnly  con- 
demn ;  therefore,  we  cordially  endorse  the 
veto  of  the  Freedmen's  Bureau  Bill,  and 
declare  that  in  our  judgment  the  courage 
displayed,  the  doctrines  avowed,  and  the 
high  sense  of  rights  manifested  in  that 
message,  and  subsequent  speeches,  prom- 
ise well  for  the  future  administration  of 
the  President,  and  we  hereby  pledge  him 
the  earnest  and  disinterested  support  of 
the  Indiana  Democracy  in  all  his  conflicts 
with  that  fanatical  congressional  ma- 
jority in  his  laudable  eff'orts  to  prevent 
them  from  changing  or  destroying  our 
cherished  form  of  government. 

"Resolved,  That,  in  our  opinion,  the  sole 
power  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives over  the  admission  of  members 
to  their  respective  chambers,  is  confined 
to  the  'election,  return,  and  qualification 
of  its  members  respectively ;'  that  this  con- 
vention further  declares  its  conviction 
that  Congress,  in  rejecting  from  repre- 
sentation eleven  States  acknowledged  to  be 
in  the  Union,  by  having  their  votes 
counted  in  favor  of  the  Constitutional 
amendment  abolishing  slavery,  the  Senate 
and  House  have  usurped  powers  not  dele- 
gated to  them  by  the  Constitution,  and 
are  acting  in  violation  thereof.  We  further 
believe  that  all  members  from  the 
Southern  States  who  have  been  lately 
elected,  and  possess  the  constitutional 
qualifications,  should  be  immediately  ad- 
mitted and  upon  the  refusal  of  C